Skip to main content

Full text of "Phantasms of the living"

See other formats



r~r\ T 



: fm - 1 

' - 1 H 

%. illumine all tke worltl. 













14, DEAN'S YARD, S.W. 



Page vi, line 13. For 247 read 248. Line 18. For "nearly a 
trillion of trillions of trillions " read " about a thousand billion trillion 
trillion trillions." 

Page 16, line 23. If only cases are reckoned where the auditory 
phantasm was recorded or described before the news of the death arrived, 
the odds will be reduced to about a million to 1. 

Page 17, line 29. If only cases are reckoned where the visual 
phantasm was recorded or described before the news of the death arrived, 
the odds will be reduced to about a hundred billion trillions to 1. 

Page 21, end of 8. In the numerical estimates, I have throughout 
confined the reasoning to sensory experiences, and have not attempted to 
extend it to the ideal and emotional impressions which were considered in 
the 6th and 7th chapters. This is because a trustworthy census of strong 
but purely subjective impressions of these commoner and often vaguer 
kinds would have been impossible to obtain. There is, however, one 
important point which concerns the non-sensory experiences as well as the 
sensory, and which ought not to be omitted from the argument ; the 
occurrence, namely, at various times, to a single percipient, of several 
" veridical " impressions, sometimes similar, sometimes different in type. 
(See p. 77, note.) It is clear how enormously this multiplication of the 
coincidences in one person's history multiplies the already enormous odds 
against chance as their cause. 

Page 24, line 3 of note. For 40 read 39. 

Page 26, line 8 of note. For 32 read 31. This correction will slightly, 
but not appreciably, affect the subsequent estimate. 

Page 50, case 233. The narrator mentioned in conversation that she 
woke her sister at the time of her experience, and also described it to hor 
family at breakfast, before the news of the death arrived. Her sister 
who probably supposed it to be a dream, and fell asleep again at once 
had no recollection of it when it was referred to some years ago. 

Page 52, case 235. The narrator's first initial is G. We have applied 
to the gentleman to whom the earlier account was sent ; but he forwarded 
it to some one else, and cannot now recollect to whom. The friend with 
whom Colonel Swiney was staying has long since left Norfolk, and we 
have not been able to trace him. 

Page 68, line 23. For 296 read 246. 

Pages 139-41, case 296. Further knowledge and a more critical 
study of this case suggest doubts as to whether it should have been 
included. It will be seen that three important points the impression of 
seeing the handle turn, the getting out of bed to search, and Mr. Phillips's 
statement as to his wife's having imagined herself to be in the narrator's 
house are not mentioned in the diary, but only in the account written 
more than 3 years afterwards. Moreover, it appears probable from an 
inspection of the diary that the entry for Oct. 23 was not written on 
that day, but after the news of the death had arrived on the following 
day ; and it is, therefore, not unlikely that the description, " steps as of 
a female walking aimlessly," was to some extent suggested by the news. 

Page 346, line 5. For maladie read malade. With this account should 
be compared the apparent instance of thought-transference in a case of 
hysterical catalepsy, recorded by Dr. Bristowe in the British Medical 
Journal for Feb. 8, 1879. 

Page 390, line 1. For Kirkbright read Shuckburgh. 

Page 393, case 419. A first-hand account from Mr. John A. Orr, 
F.R.C.S.I., of Fleetwood, shows that the dream on which the mother acted 
had conveyed no more than the idea of her son's serious illness, and, more- 
over, had been dreamt some nights before the accident, as she arrived on 
the morning of its occurrence. The case should, therefore, be omitted. 

Page 397, case 424. The narrator mentioned in conversation that 
the experience was a very vivid impression on waking, rather than an 
actual dream. The impression was sufficiently disquieting to keep her 
awake for several hours. 

Page 398, case 425. In conversation, Mrs. Tandy, a daughter of the 
narrator's, who has heard the percipient describe her vision, expressed a 
distinct opinion that she spoke of it as a waking experience. 

Page 404, case 432. The narrator mentioned in conversation that 
her dreams are rarely painful or distressing, and that she has never on any 
other occasion taken action on a dream. 

Page 461, first line of case 499. For 1877 read 1867. 

Page 469, case 505. The narrator not only told her sister of her ex- 
perience on the morning (Tuesday) after it occurred, but wrote the same 
day to England, expressing her uneasiness about her nephew, and asking 
if anything was wrong with him ; and Mrs. Wilkinson, (of 63, Harcourt 
Terrace, Redclifle Square, S.W.,) the boy's mother, remembers receiving 
this letter on the Wednesday evening, while she was herself in the act 
of writing to tell Miss Wilkinson of the accident. (Miss Wilkinson was 
therefore mistaken in saying that her sister-in-law wrote on the day 
after the accident.) Mrs. Wilkinson further mentioned in conversation 
that on the Monday, while lying in a semi-conscious state, the boy 
constantly asked whether his aunt had been told of the acsident. He was 
much attached to her, and had been nursed by her through a serious 

Page 474, case 509. We have procured an official certificate from New 
South Wales, which corroborates the narrator's statement that her mother 
died on June 17, 1868. 

Page 513, case 556. The name of the percipient has been privately 

Page 515, case 558. We have now received a written account of 
this incident from another daughter of the percipient, who was present at 
the time. It was inferred that the dying man spoke of the little grandson 
of whose sudden illness and death he had been kept in ignorance, from the 
fact of his turning to the child's mother and addressing her in the way 
described (the second account substitutes " Don't fret " for " Never mind"); 
but it ought to be added that he had lost a son of the same name 24 years 

Page 524, end of case 569. The name of the percipient has now 
been privately communicated. 

Page 566, line 4 from bottom. The narrator explains (Dec. 22, 1886) 
that her father was " an amateur doctor " only ; he had been a solicitor 
by profession, but had studied medicine. 

Page 584, line 29, and page 585, line 4. For Heaton read Seaton. 





1. Assuming the substantial correctness of much of the evidence 
for phantasms which have markedly coincided with an event at a distance, 
how can it be known that, these coincidences are not due to chance alone ? 
In examining this question, we must be careful to distinguish waking cases 
from dreams in which latter class (as we have seen) the scope for chance- 
coincidences is indefinitely large . . . . . . 1-4 

2. The answer to this question depends on two points the frequency 
of phantasms which have markedly coincided with real events, and the 
frequency of phantasms which have not. If the latter class turned out to 
be extremely large e.g., if we each of us once a week saw some friend's 
figure in a place which was really empty it is certain that occasionally 
such a subjective delusion would fall on the day that the friend happened 
to die. The matter is one on which there have been many guesses, and 
many assertions, but hitherto no statistics ..... 4-6 

3. To ascertain what proportion of the population have had 
experience of purely subjective hallucinations, a definite question must be 
asked of a group large and varied enough to serve as a fair sample of the 
whole. The difficulty of taking such a census has been much increased by 
a wide misunderstanding of its purpose . . . . 6-8 

4. But answers have been received from a specimen group of 5,680 
persons ; and there is every reason to suppose this number sufficient 8-10 

5. It may be objected that persons may have wrongly denied such 
experiences (1) through forgetfulness but the experiences of real im- 
portance for the end in view are too striking to be readily forgotten ; 
(2) by way of a joke or a hoax but this would lead rather to false 
confessions- than- false denials ; (3) in self-defence but such error as may 


have been produced by this motive has probably been more than counter- 
balanced in other ways 10-12 

6. First as to auditory hallucinations, representing recognised voices 
in the last 12 years such an experience has, according to the census, 
befallen 1 adult in every 90 ; but it would have had to befall 
7 in every 10, to justify the assumption that the cases recorded in this 
work on first-hand testimony, of the coincidence of the experience 
in question with the death of the person represented, were due to 
chance. The odds against the accidental occurrence of the said coinci- 
dences are more than a trillion to 1 . . . . . . 12-16 

7. Next as to visual hallucinations, representing a recognised face 
or form in the last 12 years such an experience has, according to the 
census, befallen 1 adult in every 247 ; but it would have had to 
befall every adult once, and most adults twice, to justify the assumption 
that the cases recorded in the present work on first-hand testimony, of the 
coincidence of the experience in question with the death of the person 
represented, were due to chance. The odds against the accidental 
occurrence of the said coincidences are nearly a trillion of trillions of 
trillions to 1 16-18 

8. The extreme closeness of some of the coincidences affords the basis 
for another form of estimate, which shows the improbability of their 
accidental occurrence to be almost immeasurably great . . 18-20 

And a number of further cases and further considerations remain, by 
which even this huge total of improbability would be again swelled. 
The conclusion, therefore, after all allowances, that at any rate a large 
number of the coincidences here adduced have had some other cause than 
chance seems irresistible 20-21 

9. An argument of a quite different sort may be drawn from certain 
peculiarities which the group of coincidental hallucinations present, when 
compared, as a whole, with the general mass of transient hallucinations 
of the sane. The chief of these peculiarities are (1) the decided pre- 
ponderance of visual cases over auditory, and (2) the immense 
preponderance of cases where the figure or voice was recognised as 
representing some one known to the percipient : whereas among clearly 
subjective hallucinations there is a very great preponderance of auditory 
cases, and almost an equality between recognised and unrecognised 
phantasms, the preponderance being slightly with the latter . 22-25 

Another striking point the preponderance of cases in which the 
distant event with which the phantasm coincides is death, or one of the 
crises that come nearest to death again marks out the coincidental 
phantasms as a distinct group of natural phenomena . . 2528 




1. Visual hallucinations may present various degrees of apparent 
externalisation, beginning with what is scarcely more than a picture in 
the mind's eye, and ending with a percept which seems quite on a par 
with all surrounding objects. Examples of these varieties in telepathic 
phantasms .......... 29-37 

2. Examples of completely externalised phantasms. In connection 
with one case (No. 225) it is shown that a slight liability to subjective 
hallucinations (which a few telepathic percipients have exhibited) need 
not seriously affect the probability that a particular experience was 
telepathic. Another case (No. 242) is remarkable in that the actual 
percipient had no direct connection with the agent, but was in the vicinity 
of a person intimately connected with him .... 38-62 

3. Cases where the hypothesis of illusion or mistaken identity has 
to be taken into account. This hypothesis would not exclude a telepathic 
origin, as telepathic illusions are quite conceivable phenomena. But more 
probably these cases were hallucinations ; and if so, their telepathic origin 
would hardly be doubtful. One of them (No. 243) exhibits the point of a 
previous compact between the agent and percipient, that whichever died 
first should endeavour to make the other sensible of his presence. Such 
a compact, latent in either mind, may quite conceivably have some 
conditioning efficacy ........ 62-73 

4. Cases of a rudimentary type perhaps of arrested development 
not representative of a human form ; they might be compared to a motor 
effect which is limited to a single start or twitch. The class is too small 
to carry any conviction on its own account, but its type is not so 
improbable as might at first appear ...... 73-76 

5. Certain cases involving no coincidence with any ostensibly 
abnormal condition of the agent. (1) Instances where several percipients, 
at different times, have had hallucinations representing the same person, 
in whom a specific faculty for producing telepathic impressions may there- 
fore be surmised ......... 77-90 

6. And (2) instances where a presumption that a hallucination was. 
not purely subjective is afforded by peculiarities of dress or aspect in the 
figure presented ......... 90-96 

7. And (3) instances where the phantasm appears at a time when the 


person whom it represents is, unknown to the percipient, actually approach- 
ing him, with thoughts more or less consciously turned in his direction. 
The last two examples (Nos. 265 and 266) are auditory . . 96-100 



1. Cases where the phantasm has been of a recognised voice the 
words heard having been, certainly in some cases and possibly in others, 
those which the distant agent was uttering. One case (No. 269) illustrates 
the feature of repetition after a short interval . . . 101-108 

2. Cases where what was heard was the percipient's own name 
which is a very common form of purely subjective hallucination. 

In most of these cases there may probably have been a certain occupa- 
tion of the agent's thoughts with the percipient . . . 108-114 

3. Cases where the phantasm has been of an unrecognised voice. 
In one instance, (No. 279) several experiences of the sort, in close 
coincidence with the deaths of relatives, have occurred to the same 
percipient .......... 114-118 

4. Cases where the impression was of a complete sentence, convey- 
ing either a piece of information or a direction, projected by the percipient 
as a message from without . . , . . . 118-124 

5. An example where the sound heard was vocal, but not recognised 
and articulate ......... 124-125 

6. Phantasms of non-vocal noises or shocks. These are parallel to 
the rudimentary visual hallucinations ; but need a more jealous scrutiny, 
since odd noises are often due to undiscovered physical causes in the 
vicinity. Still, some impressions of the sort are pretty clearly hallucina- 
tory ; and the form is one which telepathic hallucinations seem occa- 
sionally to take. The final case (No. 291) suggests the possibility of 
family susceptibility to telepathic influences . . . 125-132 



1. Purely subjective impressions of touch, of at all a distinct kind, 
are rare ; and when they occur, may often be accounted for as illusions due 



to an involuntary muscular twitch. It is not surprising, therefore, that 
telepathic hallucinations of this type should be rare . . 133-134 

The most conclusive examples are those where an affection of 
touch is combined with one of sight or hearing. Examples . 135-139 

2. Combined affections of the senses of sight and hearing : one 
case (No. 299) is peculiar in that the person who was probably the agent 
was in the percipient's company at the time . . . 139-149 

3. A case where the impressions of sight and hearing were separated 
by some hours ......... 149-152 



1. It occasionally happens that at the time when A telepathically 
influences B, A on his side has an impression which strongly suggests that 
B has reciprocally influenced him. The best proof of this is where A 
expresses in words some piece of knowledge as to B's condition. Other 
more doubtful cases (of which a few are quoted) may be provisionally 
referred to the same type ; but unless A's description includes something 
which he could not have known or guessed in a normal manner, his 
alleged percipience of B cannot be assumed to have been more than mere 
subjective dream or vision ....... 153-158 

2. Examples of apparently reciprocal action. They may be regarded 
as special cases of " telepathic clairvoyance " ; A's percipience of B being 
apparently active rather than passive, and due to some extension 
of his own faculties, connected with the abnormality of condition 
that occasions his agency, and not to any special abnormality in B's 
condition 158-166 

The cases which, on the evidence, would be clearly reciprocal, are so 
few in number as to justify a doubt whether they represent a genuine 
type. Supposing them to be genuine, however, their rarity is not hard to 
account for ; and it may be hoped that time will bring us more well- 
attested specimens . . . . , . . . . 167 




1. Phantasms which have affected the senses of more than one per- 
cipient, are a specially perplexing class. On the face of them, they 
suggest a real objective presence of the person seen or heard. But such 
" objectivity " (unless conceived as some illusive form of matter) can 
hardly be denned except just as a temporary existence in more minds than 
one : it does not explain, but merely repeats, the fact that the experience 
is collective ......... 168-170 

In the absence of evidence (worthy of the name) that a telepathic 
phantasm has ever given a test of physical reality e.g., by opening a door 
or a window we are led to inquire how far the phenomena of collective 
hallucination can be covered by a theory of purely psychical impressions. 
Two views (which will subsequently prove capable of amalgamation) 
present themselves : (1) that A, at a distance, produces simultaneous 
telepathic impressions on the minds of B and C, who happen to be together; 
(2) that B's impression, however originated, passes on to C by a process 
of thought-transference the hallucination itself being, so to speak, 
infectious 170-171 

2. The first of these hypotheses presents great difficulties. For our 
review of telepathic hallucinations, so far, has shown that they may take 
very various forms, and may be projected at various intervals of time 
(within a range of a few hours) from the crisis or event to which we trace 
them ; so that, supposing several persons to have been the joint recipients 
of a telepathic impression, it seems most improbable that they should 
independently invest it at the same moment with the same sensory form. 
Nor, again, should we expect to find, among those jointly affected, any 
person who wag a stranger to the distant agent ; nevertheless, cases occur 
where such a person has shared in the collective percipience. And yet 
again, on this theory of independent affection of several persons, there 
seems no special reason why they should be in one another's company at 
the time, since the agent may presumably exercise his influence equally in 
any direction ; nevertheless, cases where the percipients have been apart 
are, in fact, extremely rare ....... 171-172 

A few examples of the sort are given; but in several even of these, the 
percipients, though not together, were very near one another, and had 

been to some extent sharing the same life .... 173-183 


3. AS to the second of the proposed hypotheses that one percipient 
catches the hallucination from another by a process of thought-trans- 


ferenee the question at once suggests itself whether such communicability 
is ever found in cases where no distant agent is concerned cases of 
purely subjective hallucination. Such an idea would, no doubt, be as new 
to scientific psychology as every other form of thought-transference ; but 
transient hallucinations of the sane have been so little studied or collected 
that it is not surprising if the evidence for collective experiences of the 
sort has escaped attention though collective illusions have sometimes 
been described as hallucinations ...... 183-184 

It is in collective cases that the importance of distinguishing illusions 
from hallucinations becomes plain. In illusions, the persons affected 
receive an actual sensory impression from a real object, the error being 
simply in their way of interpreting it ; and in the interpretation they are 
often greatly at the mercy of one another's suggestions. Many historical 
incidents such as visions of signs in the heavens and of phantom 
champions might be thus explained ..... 184-186 

In other alleged instances of " collective hallucination " there is no 
proof that the impression was really more than a vivid mental picture, 
evoked under excitement. And even where the image probably has been 
externalised in space as, e.g., in religious epidemics, or in experimentation 
with hypnotised subjects most cases may be at once explained, without 
any resort to thought-transference, as due to a common idea or expectancy. 
(Apart, however, from special excitement or from hypnotism, the power 
of mere verbal suggestion to produce delusions of the senses may easily be 
exaggerated) 186-188 

It is only when these various conditions are absent when the joint 
percept is clearly hallucination, and is also projected by the several 
percipients without emotional preparation or suggestion that the 
hypothesis of thought-transference from one percipient to another can 
reasonably be entertained ....... 189-190 

4. The examples to be adduced, of collective hallucinations, not 
apparently originating in the condition of any absent living person, 
include cases which may be regarded by some as indicating post-mortem 
agency. It is not necessary to enter into the vexed question as to 
whether the power of exercising psychical energy can or cannot continue 
after physical death. Whatever answer that question received, these cases 
would still, in the writer's opinion, (for reasons set forth in 2,) bear 
witness to a quite mundane transference between the minds of the living 
percipients .......... 190-192 

5. Visual examples. Hallucinations of light - . . 192-194 
Various out-of-door experiences, not easy to explain as illusions 194-198 
Examples of the simultaneous appearance of an unrecognised figure to 


two percipients, who in most instances were in each other's company at 
the time. The two impressions received in several cases were not precisely 
similar, and in one (No. 322) were markedly different . . 198-207 

Similar appearances of recognised phantasms ; one of which (case 333) 
represented the form of one of the percipients . . . 208-218 

The auditory class requires special care, owing to the liability of real 
sounds (whose source is often uncertain) to be misinterpreted. Examples 
of voices 218-221 

And of musical hallucinations ..... 221-223 

The examples may at all events show that a purely psychical account of 
these joint experiences is possible. It is not, indeed, obvious why hallucina- 
tions of the senses should be a form of experience liable to transmission from 
mind to mind ; but as regards the cases which are telepathically originated, 
some explanation may perhaps be found in the fact that they at any rate 
involve a disturbance of a very peculiar kind . . . 224-225 

6. Collective hallucinations of telepathic origin. Auditory examples, 
representing vocal sounds ....... 226-230 

And non-vocal sounds ....... 230-235 

Visual examples. In two of these (Nos. 345 and 346) the experiences 
of the several percipients were not precisely similar. Another case 
(No. 349) affords an opportunity for estimating the probability of a 
collective mistake of identity ...... 235-264 

7. The fact that in most of the examples the two percipients, B and 
0, were together suggests that mere community of scene, or of immediate 
mental occupation, may establish a rapport favourable to "psychical" 
transferences ......... 264-266 

And this conception may lead us, in cases where a distant agent, A, is 
concerned, to an amalgamation of the two hypotheses (see 1) which have 
hitherto been treated separately. C's experience, qud hallucination, that 
is to say in its sensory character, may be derived from B's ; but, for all 
that, A may be telepathically affecting C. It may be A's joint influence 
on B and C that has conditioned the transference of sensation between 
them ; or, in cases where C holds no intimate relation to A, a rapport may 
be established, ad hoc, between A and C by the rapport of both of them 
with B who thus serves, so to speak, as a channel for O's percipience ; and 
this would even help to explain the cases where B is not himself con- 
sciously percipient . . . . . . . 266-268 

The conception of rapport through community of mental occupation 
might explain the various cases where the telepathic influence seems to 
have been locally conditioned, by the presence of the percipient in a place 
that was interesting to the agent. And the idea may receive a still 


further extension in cases where there is reason to suppose a reciprocal 
telepathic clairvoyance of the scene on the agent's part . 268-269 
Conjectures of this sort concerning the more outlying telepathic 
phenomena have an air of rashness ; but the mere fact that " psychical " 
transferences are possible, when once admitted, opens up a scheme of 
Idealism within whose bounds (if bounds there be) the potential unity 
between individual minds is at any rate likely to realise itself in surprising 
ways . , , 270 


1. The case for spontaneous telepathy, being essentially a cumulative 
one, hardly admits of being recapitulated in a brief and attractive form. 
Nothing but a detailed study of the evidence dull as that study is can 
justify definite conclusions concerning it. After all, the dulness is perhaps 
not greater than attaches to the mastery of details in other departments 
of knowledge ; and it cannot be too clearly realised that what the research 
requires is not sensational incidents, but verified dates . 271-272 

2. The present instalment of evidence, with all its defects, may yet, 
by making the idea of telepathy better understood, facilitate collection in 
the future ; and already various difficulties and prejudices show signs of 
giving way ........... 273 

3. But though a fair field is sure, in time, to be allowed to the 
work, its advance must depend on very wide co-operation ; and the more so 
as the several items of proof tend to lose their effect as they recede into 
the past. The experimental investigations must be greatly extended, the 
spontaneous phenomena must be far more intelligently watched for and 
recorded, before the place of telepathy in scientific psychology can be 
absolutely assured 273-274 


1. The hypotheses contained in this note are tentatively advanced, 
but may at least direct observation . . . . ... 277 

2. The theory which represents a veridical phantasm as the extcrnal- 
isation of a telepathic impression encounters a difficulty in the fact that 
when two (or more) persons are together the phantasm is usually, though 
not always, perceived by both , 277-278 


3. This complex fact seems in the first place inconsistent with the 
popular theory of a material ghost, or " meta-organism," a theory on 
other grounds objectionable ; * 278-279 

4. Nor can we always assume a separate telepathic impulse from A to 
B and from A to C. Mr. Gurney therefore supposes a fresh telepathic 
communication from BtoC: . . . . . . . 279 

5. But no such cases of communication of hallucinations are recorded 
by alienists who have treated of " folie a deux " ; . . 279-280 

6. And in morbid hallucinations of the sane, no degree of duration or 
intensity seems to effect this communication of the hallucination to 
bystanders . . . . 280-282 

7. Moreover, in Mr. Gurney's collection of casual hallucinations of 
the sane, there are no collective cases which are indisputably 
falsidical; . . ... . . . . 282-284 

8. Alleged phantasms of the dead, for instance, cannot all be classed 
with certainty as merely illusory in the present state of our 
knowledge . .......... 284 

9. It may be better, then, to fall back on observation of the experi- 
mental cases, and to note that in them the percipient exercises a species of 
supernormal activity . . . ... . . . 284-286 

10. Such activity, if pushed further, might become first telepathic 
clairvoyance, then independent clairvoyance . . . 286-287 

11. Clairvoyant perception seems to be exercised in inverse ratio to 
activity of normal faculties, and to be stimulated by influence from another 
mind . . ' 287 

12. If this be so, we have an analogy which throws light on cases 
in this book where a dreaming, or even a waking, percipient becomes 
conscious of a distant scene ;...... 287-289 

13. And, furthermore, our cases suggest that correspondently with 
clairvoyant perception there may be phantasmogenetic efficacy : . 289 

14. So that all the persons present together may be equally likely to 
discern the phantasmal correlate of the dying man's clairvoyant perception ; 
and collective cases will no longer present a unique difficulty . 289-290 

15. And this will hold good whatever view we take of the relation 


to space or matter, either of the clairvoyant percipience or of its phantasmal 
correlate . . 290-291 

16. This view suggests test-experiments. Points to be noticed in a 
collective hallucination ; ....... 291-292 

17. And in a hallucination induced by hypnotic suggestion 292-293 

18. But if the dying man's conception of himself is thus presented 
as a quasi-percept to a group of persons collectively, then some cases where 
there is one percipient only maybe similarly explained . . 293-294 

19. If we consider the indications of origin in one or the other mind 
given by the dress of phantoms, we find no clear case where such origin 
must be referred to the percipient's mind ; . . . . 294-297 

20. And the symbolism of phantoms also is generally such as may 
have been common to both minds ..... 297-298 

21. On the other hand there are cases where the dying man's actual 
dress at the moment, though an improbable one, is reproduced by the 
phantom, which thus is clothed according to the dying man's conception 
of himself, and probably not according to the percipient's antecedent 
conception of him ;......... 298 

22. And the symbolism of the figure sometimes conveys true infor- 
mation, or is in other ways probably referable to the dying man 299-300 

23. And the cases of imperfect or deferred recognition seem similarly 
to indicate that the aspect of the apparition has not been determined by 
the percipient himself ........ 300-301 

24. Moreover, the attraction which determines the phantasmal 
presence seems sometimes to be local rather than personal ; as if the 
percipient merely saw an apparition which was generated by causes 
independent of himself 301-302 

25. It may be said that on this view the mass of our cases should be 
reciprocal. But in order to prove a case reciprocal it is necessary that 
clairvoyant percipience should be recollected, which is a rare thing 302-303 

26. Still further, the agent's death often prevents his recounting such 
percipience as he may have enjoyed. His last words sometimes indicate* 
that there has been such percipience. Dr. Ormsby's case . 303-306 

27. In our few cases of volu/ntary self -projection the experience seems 
rarely to have persisted into waking memory ; 306-307 


28. And after clairvoyant dreams the fact of the clairvoyant invasion 
may be forgotten till revived by accidental presence in the scene thus 
discerned ........... 307 

29. Invasion, however, is sometimes remembered ; faintly and 
brokenly by an agent waking at the time ; . . . . 307-308 

30. More often and more distinctly by an agent sleeping at the 
time 308 

31. Such reciprocity seems further facilitated by a state of trance 
or delirium 309-310 

32. Stages by which, in this view, veridical phantasms gradually 
approach a reciprocal type ....... 310-311 

33. Power of the death or crisis of one person to evoke the 
clairvoyant percipience, and invite the supernormal invasion, of another. 
Parallel with clairvoyance mesmerically induced . . . 311-312 

34. A true classification must depend on the condition and crises of 
the unconscious rather than of the conscious self . . . 312-314 

35. In the meantime reciprocal percipience may be taken as the type 
of a fully-developed veridical hallucination ; its relation to space and 
matter being as yet unknown . . . . . . .314 

36. Suggested analogy of telepathic with vital or organic com- 
munication . ... 314-316 



1. The supplementary evidence for telepathy, like that in the main 
body of the work, consists of experimental cases (Chap. I.) and of 
spontaneous cases (Chaps. II.-IX.) . . . . . . 321 

2. The spontaneous cases, in the aggregate, have less force than those 
which have preceded the chances of error in many of them being very 
appreciable, and some of them being second-hand. Still, the evidence is for 
the most part of a character which allows us to suppose that the essential 


point, has been truly retained, even though details may have been altered 
or added 321-322 

3. And since this evidence, which might not prove the reality of 
spontaneous telepathy, is sufficient, even alone, to establish a very strong 
presumption for it, it lends an important support to the cumulative 
argument already presented ....... 322-323 



1. Experiments in the transference of tastes and pains . 324-329 

Occasionally the transference seems to be from the " subject " to the 

operator 330-331 

2. Examples of the power of the will in producing the hypnotic 
condition, or in evoking particular actions . . . . 331-334 

3 Transferences of ideas unconnected with movement. One 
remarkable record (No. 366) exemplifies a very long-continued suscepti- 
bility on the percipient's part. Several of the cases, here treated as 
telepathic, have been attributed without sufficient grounds to independent 
clairvoyance ..... ... 334-348 



1. Examples of spontaneous thought-transference of a tolerably 
literal kind, several of which suggest a fugitive faculty of percipience 
developed by illness 349-362 

2. Examples of an apparently abnormal intuition of the approach 
or proximity of certain persons ...... 363-365 

3. Cases where the " agency " is difficult or impossible to assign, 
and which recall the Greek notion of <f>t)M .... 365-370- 

4. Emotional impressions (involving in one case No. 391 distinct 
physical discomfort) which the percipients connected at the moment with 
particular individuals ........ 370-374 

VOL. II. b 


5. Emotional impressions not so connected . . . 374-376 
6. Examples of motor effects ..... 376-379 


1. Examples of simultaneous dreams corresponding in con- 
tent 380-383 

2. Examples of dreams which have seemed to represent some 
thought or mental picture in the mind of a waking agent . 383-393 

3. Examples of dreams which have directly corresponded with a 
real event (usually death) that befell the agent . , . 393-401 

4. Examples of pictorial dreams with a similar correspondence ; 
in many of which the dreamer has invested the idea with original 
(symbolic or fantastic) imagery ...... 401-428 

5. Examples of dreams that may be described as telepathically 
clairvoyant, in several of which (Nos. 481-4) the object prominently 
presented has been a letter ....... 428-448 



1. First-hand cases of rather remote date : Visual cases 449-459 

Auditory cases ........ 459-461 

2. First-hand and more recent cases : Visual cases . 461-470 

Auditory cases . . . . . . . . 470-474 

3. A group of first-hand cases taken from printed sources 474-477 

4. Second-hand cases from informants who were nearly related to 

the original witnesses ........ 477-496 

5. And from informants who were not so related . . 496-508 



1. First-hand death-cases 509-523 

2. First-hand cases where the conditioning event on the agent's side 
was something other than death ...... 523-532 

3. Second-hand cases from informants who were nearly related to 
the original witnesses. In connection with one of these cases (No. 583) 
some remarks are made on the Scotch " second sight" ; another case (No. 
586) illustrates the difference between the right and the wrong sort of 
transmitted evidence . ....... 532-542 

4. Second-hand cases from informants who were not nearly related 
to the original witnesses ....... 543-558 

5. Ancient cases, which, by rare exception, were recorded in such a 
way as to have permanent value ...... 558-560 



1. Cases where the impression was of distinct words . 561-568 

2. Cases where the impression apparently represented what was 

actually in the agent's ears at the time .... 568-570 

3. Non-vocal cases ....... 570-574 

4. Tactile cases 574-576 

A case suggesting a peculiar sympathy of physical condition 576-577 


SENSES 578-589 


RECIPROCAL CASES , . . . . % * 590-599 
VOL. ii. b 2 



1. Three outlying cases . '.. 600-603 

2. Visual cases, apparently connected with the condition of a distant 
agent, occurring to percipients who were apart . . . 603-607 

3. And to percipients who were together . . . 607-623 

4. Visual cases where it is doubtful whether there was any "agency" 
on the part of the person whom the phantasm represented . 623-630 

5. Auditory cases, where the impression was of a recognised 
voice .......... 631-634 

6. And where the impression was of inarticulate or non- vocal 
sounds 634-641 


1. Experimental cases 

Reproduction of diagrams . . . . . 642-653 
Transference of ideas of numbers, words, and 

objects ' . 653-666 

Transference of tastes 666-669 

Transference of ideas below the threshold of 

consciousness ...... 669-671 

2. Transitional cases 

Production of visual phantasms at a distance . 671-676 
Hypnotic effects at a distance .... 676-687 

3. Spontaneous cases of various types. The last two 
(Nos. 701 and 702) afford a specially good 
illustration of the psychological identity of 
dreams and hallucinations . 687-705 



INDEX . . - . . 725-733 



Page 13, line 13 from bottom. " One in every 90 of the population." 
The probability that the ratio -fa, observed in the specimen-group, may be 
fairly assumed as correct for the whole population, admits of precise 
determination. A general idea of its degree of correctness may be 
obtained from the following analogue, which I owe to Mr. F. Y. Edge- 
worth. Suppose 5680 balls to be drawn from a bag containing immense 
numbers of black and white balls, mixed in a certain ratio. If the real 
ratio of black balls to the total be g^r, the odds against our drawing so 
small a proportion of black balls as ^ i.e., the odds against the ratio 
appearing to be ^ are about 10 to 1. If the real ratio be ^\j, the odds 
against its appearing to be so small as -fa are about 500 to 1. If the real 
ratio be ^, the odds against its appearing to be so small as -fa are more 
than 100,000 to 1. It will become obvious, I think, as we proceed, that 
even in this last contingency on the violently improbable assumption 
that the true ratio of hallucines in the population is double that observed 
in the specimen group my general conclusion would remain safe, even for 
the auditory cases ; and a fortiori for the visual cases, where a far smaller 
ratio is substituted for fa. But it is enough to notice that practically, as 
the ratio for the population is as likely to be less than the specimen-ratio 
as greater, and as it cannot differ from it very materially on either side, 
the specimen-ratio may safely be used. 

Page 24, line 1. For 13 read 12, and for 6 read 7. Lines 17-22. 
Among the " recognised " visual cases, I include three where the figure 
seen did not represent the person who was probably the agent. I do not 
reckon on either side two cases of mis-recognition, which might equally 
well be described as partial recognition ; nor three cases where the recogni- 
tion was retrospective; nor four "collective" cases where one of the per- 
cipients recognised the agent, but the other was a stranger to him. I 
reckon in the unrecognised class three cases where the percipient was a 
stranger to the agent, but described his appearance correctly. Among 
the " recognised " auditory cases, I include two where the voice heard was 
not that of the supposed agent. I do not reckon on either side case 279; 
nor case 507 where the recognition was retrospective ; nor the case of - 
mis-recognition, No. 570. 

Page 25, note. The slight difference from the numbers given in 
Vol. I., pp. 392 and 498, is due to cases received since those pages were 
printed off. 


Page 26, lines 12 and 13. For 399 read 401, and for 303 read 304. 

Page 27. " The only way of meeting this argument," <fcc. In more 
technical language, the point stands thus. The determination of the 
d, posteriori probability that certain events took place by chance depends 
not only on the " objective " probability of the occurrence of such events 
under a regime of chance, but on d priori probabilities depending (except 
in imaginary problems about bags and balls) on what Professor A. Marshall 
has felicitously called " that abstract and essence of past experience which 
is on the one side science, and on. the other practical instinct." And as 
Mr. F. Y. Edgeworth remarks, in writing to me on this topic, " Scratches 
or ordering boots might be as unique experiences as death, or at any rate 
not materially more frequent ; yet all would agree that the d priori 
probability of a causal connection between a phantasm and ordering boots 
is nil; while as to death, many would think differently." Now in 
applying this remark, it must be remembered that that which alone could 
make a number of the coincidences whether between phantasms and 
orderings of boots, or between phantasms and deaths explicable as 
accidental occurrences, would be the universal though unknown and 
unnoticed prevalence of spectral illusions. This is itself a huge im- 
probability, determined as such by the relation of the statistical results of 
my census to complex d, priori probabilities concerning facts of human 
memory and testimony. And what I have implied in the text is simply that 
it is an improbability so huge as to outweigh the a priori improbability of a 
causal connection between phantasms and deaths, though not perhaps the 
a priori improbability of a causal connection between phantasms and 
orderings of boots. 

Page 37, first note. Since this note was printed, I have met with an 
interesting case of the peculiar sensation described, in connection with 
purely subjective hallucinations. Mr. J. Russell Lowell tells me that in 
past years he had frequent hallucinations of vision, of both the recognised 
and the unrecognised sort, which greatly interested him ; and that the 
experience was ushered in (he believes invariably) by a feeling of marked 
chill, which seemed to ascend from the feet to the head. 

Page 37, second note. Mr. Lowell also tells me that though the figures 
he saw were sometimes quite natural-looking, at other times they were of 
the semi-transparent sort here described, allowing the wall or furniture to 
be seen through them. He spoke of these as looking as if composed of 
" blue film " a description which is of great interest, when taken in con- 
nection with some of the telepathic cases, e.g., Nos. 210, 311, 315, 
485, 555. 

Page 39, line 2 from bottom. For Act read Acte. 

Page 42, case 226. In conversation, General H. informed Mr. Pod- 
more that the native who was with him at the time of his experience was 
not facing the figure, but still would probably have been aware of the 
presence of a real person who occupied the spot where the figure was seen. 


Page 66 note. For case 197 read cases 197 and 509. 

Page 67, case 245. The narrator has added, in conversation, that he 
was in Huddersfield for the day only, and that his sudden resolve necessi- 
tated his telegraphing to the friends with whom he was staying. For the 
moment he does not know the address of these friends; but he hopes to 
procure us their recollections as to the receipt of this telegram and his 
subsequent explanation of it. 

Page 71, case 249. The following corroboration is supplied by Mr. 
and Mrs. Coates, of 156, Waperton Road, Bradford, who were with Mr. 
Carr at the time : 

"June 23, 1886. 

" We shall only be able to confirm the statement of Mr. T. Carr. So 
far as we can remember, while we were sitting in the room, T. C. came 
from his chair to the window ; and, while looking out of the window, he 
made the remark, ' Ah, there is [X.] coming to see us,' and stepped back 
from the window, waiting to hear a knock at the door, which however did 
not come. T. C. remarked that he must have gone up the yard, and looked 
at the clock to see what time it was. We afterwards heard that at the 
time we thought [X.] was in the yard, he was just about dying. 


In conversation, Mr. Coates gave the time as about 4 p.m. ; and spoke 
of Mr. Carr's consulting his watch. 

Page 72, case 250. In conversation I have learnt from Mr. Schofield 
that he had been absent from home for some days which explains his 
having heard nothing of the illness. The deceased had a warm affection 
for his mother. 

Page 85, case 257. Since this case was printed, a hallucination 
representing the same person has been seen by a fourth percipient. Mrs. 
Glanville writes from Shute Haye, Walditch, Bridport, on Aug. 23, 1886 : 

" After breakfast this morning, I was outside the breakfast-room 
window, looking about, when I saw Mrs. Stone walking up one of the paths 
by the side of the lawn. I followed her. The path is long and winds 
round. I saw her turn the corner into a path that led through the orchard, 
but when I came there I could not see her. I wondered at her walking 
so quickly as to go out of sight, and strolled on, following the path, which 
led me back to the house. Here I saw Mrs. Stone talking to the gardener. 
She was surprised when I asked her how I could have missed her, and 
said she had not been walking at all, had not left her plants. Well, I saw 
her, her black dress, her white cap, her walk, Mrs. Stone certainly, but 
whether out of herself, or by an impression on my brain, I cannot telL 
but I never saw anything more distinctly." [A plan of the paths was 

Mrs. Stone writes, Aug. 25, 1886 : 

" You wish me to give an account of my proceedings when Mrs. Glan- 


ville saw my double. About 10 on the morning of Monday, August 23rd, 
I had gone direct from the house to water some flowers in a greenhouse 
marked in Mrs. Glanville's plan. My mind was rather disturbed at not 
hearing from my son. I was watering in a rather dazed, mechanical way, 
but did not lose consciousness. Walking from the place I met Mrs. Glan- 
ville, who said, ' How could you get here without my seeing you ? ' I had 
not been near the spot where she saw me." 

The percipient in this case has had one other visual hallucination 
representing a living person, which was very likely telepathic. She thus 
describes it : 

" I remember one experience of the same sort happening when I was a 
girl. I certainly did see an old gentleman in the street who was then on 
his death-bed, but nobody would believe it. He was standing outside his 
shop-door ; there were two other men with him. I can see him now in 
my mind's eye a tall thin man ; I knew his face quite well. When I 
said at dinner that Mr. Worth was better, for I had seen him in the street, 
my father told me he had just called, and Mr. Worth was very ill, in fact 
dying, and I must be mistaken." 

Page 112, case 277. The narrator has explained to me that her 
mother was taken ill on the Saturday night, and lay all that night and the 
next day on the sofa, muttering to herself, but not thought to be dying. 

Page 116, case 281. We have procured, from the Acting Registrar- 
General at Fiji, a certificate which shows that the death took place on 
Sept. 8, 1875. But we learn from the Astronomer-Royal that, until 
recently, the nomenclature of days of the month at Fiji followed the rule 
of Australia. Sept. 8, 1875, therefore, began there nearly 12 hours before 
it began here ; so that unless the deceased was bathing late in the evening, 
the narrator's experience must have followed the death by more than 12 
hours. This, of course, is on the supposition that the experience was 
really on the night of the 8th, and not of the 7th ; in which latter case 
the coincidence might have been exact. The narrator is sure that the 8th 
was the date not, however, from any independent recollection of the 
number 8, but on the ground that she referred to her diary after she heard 
of the death, and verified the coincidence, which she then mentioned to 
one or two persons. But it will be seen from her account that, for aught 
she knew, the death might have occurred on the 7th ; and therefore the 
days would have seemed to her to have very probably coincided if the day 
which she found noted in her diary was also the 7th. Should the diary 
ever be found, the point may be cleared up. 

Page 123, case 287. Since this case was printed, I have learnt from 
Dr. Joseph Smith that he was seeing Mrs. Gandy nearly every day. He 
nevertheless feels pretty confident that his experience was not due to any- 
thing that he had heard or observed arguing that that explanation of it, if 
it had been the true one, would have occurred to him at the time. But 
extremely slight and transient impressions may, for aught we know, serve 
as the germ of subsequent hallucinations, just as they may serve as the 


germ of subsequent dreams ; and the case ought not, I think, to have 
received an evidential number. 

Page 199, case 319. Both witnesses are positive that the case was not 
one of mere illusion ; though it was dusk, there was enough light for the 
clergyman to observe that the figure outside was rather badly dressed, 
besides differing from Dr. Cant in being considerably stouter and wearing 
a beard. They discussed the matter the same evening, at about 1 1 p.m. 
In the interval, something had occurred by which Dr. Cant tells us that 
he was a good deal impressed. At about 8 p.m. he was called to visit 
a stranger, who was dying, and who had expressly desired his attend- 
ance ; and he was startled by the close (though not exact) resemblance 
of this man to the hallucinatory figure. 

Page 209, case 326. Mrs. R.'s sister, Miss Norman, of Stone, Stafford, 
has sent the following independent testimony, dated June 21, 1886 : 

" A.fter the lapse of so many years, the statement I now write is all 
that I can remember of seeing my father and mother walking together, in 
the year 1843, in the village where we then resided. At the time, my 
father was from home, ver^ ill ; and my mother, to the best of my remem- 
brance, was out on that day. I have a very vivid recollection of the 
vision, which I think remarkable. My parents were walking together 
by the churchyard wall, close to the parsonage. This happened in September, 

Mrs. R. writes that she is confident that neither she nor the man- 
servant saw her mother's figure : " He saw just what I saw my father 
entering the church by the vestry door." After so long an interval, it is 
likely enough that the sisters' accounts might differ, even if their expe- 
riences had been identical. But it seems quite possible, on the analogy of 
several other cases, that the simultaneous hallucinations were not exactly 

Page 237, line 24. After Mr. R. Hodgson insert " and later the 
present writer." 

Page 247, lines 4, 5. The testimony in question has now been 
obtained, and is as follows : 

" Lakeside Cottages, Newby Bridge. 

"June, 1886. 

" It was one evening, about 4 years ago, that I sat in the kitchen, at Lin- 
dale Parsonage, at supper, and looking at the window I saw, at the side of the 
blind, which was not hanging quite straight, a very pale face looking at 
ine. It was turned sideways when I first saw it, and thinking it was one of 
the young men from the village come up to make game of us, I made a face 
at it ; then it turned full face towards me, and I saw that it was the face of 
Mrs. John Robinson, my present husband's first wife. It looked very pale. 
I watched it with the other servants for about 3 minutes perhaps, and then 
it dropped down and disappeared. I could see all round it, 1 so that I 

1 Compare cases 553 and 572. 


could see that it was not a real face, and it was too close to the window 
for that. It looked as if resting on the sill. 

" I have never on any other occasion seen anything which was not 
really there. " HELEN ROBINSON." 

Page 297, line 14. Before p. 546 insert Vol. I. 

Page 336, case 366. The phenomena of mesmeric rapport described in 
this case strongly suggest a specific influence exercised by the operator, of 
a sort not as yet recognised in the various scientific theories of hypnotism ; 
but a more decisive proof of such an influence is of course afforded if the 
same operator has produced kindred effects on more than one " subject." 
After the case in the text was printed, I heard from Mrs. Pinhey of 
another occurrence which, from this point of view, is of the greatest 
interest, besides supplying a parallel to the examples of the telepathic 
production of hypnotic sleep given in Vol. I., p. 88, and below, pp. 679-87. 
During the period when the events described in case 366 were proceeding, 
Mrs. Pinhey was staying with some friends at Pakenham, and was 
requested by Sir Walter Trevelyan, one of the party, to try to induce 
mesmeric sleep in another guest, Miss Lofft. Mrs. Pinhey was rather 
unwilling, but at last consented. 

" The experiment was quite successful as far as it went. Miss L. soon 
went off into the sleep and was laid upon a bed in that state. I 
believe she did not wake for some hours. The Trevelyans and Miss Loft't 
were to leave the next day, and before they did so Sir Walter startled me 
by making the following request : ' Would I, as an experiment and to 
oblige him, undertake to retire at a certain hour, which he fixed, that 
evening, and make the usual passes with an intention of again mesmerising 
Miss Lofft, who would by that time be with him and his wife at a hotel 
at Lincoln or Leicester, or some town which he named but which I have 
now forgotten 1 ' Again I hesitated. * * However, curiosity, and a 
comfortable assurance that there could be nothing in it, gradually con- 
quered my repugnance, and I promised to make the attempt, heartily 
hoping that it might not succeed. The Trevelyans and Miss Lofft all left 
at about noon for the railway station, and travelled by train to their 
destination. The day passed as usual, and I began to feel more confidence 
and could almost laugh at my former fears. When the appointed time 
came, I retired quietly to my own room, and, imagining Miss Lofft before 
me, I made the usual passes 1 just as I had done the evening before, and for 
about the same length of time. It appeared very absurd and I could not 
help laughing at the situation ; but I kept my own counsel and said 
nothing to anyone. 

" A day or two later, when I had returned home, a letter came for me 
from Sir Walter Trevelyan. It informed me in a few words that at the 
preconcerted hour Miss Lofft was sitting at table after tea or supper, that 
she suddenly began to feel very drowsy, said her sensations were the same 
as when she was being mesmerised, and that at last she slept much as she 
had done the evening before, though, I think, less deeply and for a shorter 
time. I confess that I was so astonished at this news, and found it so 
disagreeable and bewildering, that I destroyed the letter, an act I have 

1 Possibly effective indirectly, as aiding concentration of attention. 


often since regretted, and said as little as possible about the matter to 
anyone. I instinctively felt that it would be commonly regarded as so 
incredible that I had better say nothing about it, lest it should throw 
discredit upon the other experiments. Nevertheless, the main facts are 
perfectly true, though I will not undertake to answer for every detail. 
For instance, it is certainly true that Miss Lofft was affected in the way I 
have described, but I cannot remember to what exact extent." 

[A niece of Miss Lofft tells us that she remembers Mrs. Pinhey mes- 
merising her aunt at Pakenham ; but she was not told of the subsequent 

Of course if this occurrence stood alone, the most natural hypothesis 
would be that Sir Walter Trevelyan had in some way betrayed what was 
being attempted, and that the trance was caused by suggestion and 
expectancy. But in view of other cases of the same sort, and especially of 
the recent French records, it is not unreasonable to suppose that he was 
sufficiently on his guard not to mar his own carefully-planned experiment, 

that the incident was genuinely telepathic. 

Page 413, case 445. We find from the Register of Deaths that the 
lady's death took place -on March 2, 1843. The narrator tells me that 
there was no immediate apprehension of it that, for aught he knew, 
" she might have lived for 20 years." He thinks, but cannot be sure, 
that his eyes were open. 

Page 422, lines 4 and 16. For Harley read Holies. The note to 
this case (within brackets) is not quite correct, as a sailing-vessel bound 
for Melbourne might have 6 weeks' start, and still be outstripped by a 
steamer. But even with this correction, the time of the second dream 
cannot be brought into correspondence with any customary hour for a 
London funeral. 

Page 460, second note. For 568 read 569 ; for 639 read 638 ; for 654 
read 653. 

Page 485, case 522. A sister of the narrator's, who had also heard of 
the experience from her father's lips, confirms the account given. 

Page 511, case 552. In conversation, Mrs. Rooke mentioned that 
she saw the figure as she was coming out after prayers, all the students 
being behind her. This is important, as telling against the hypothesis of 
mistaken identity. She regards that hypothesis as out of the question, the 
recognition of the face being complete. The dress was a grey suit with 
black-barred pattern, and cap to match, such as the young man had been 
used to wear at the college. Mrs. Rooke did not mention her experience 
to her husband, not liking to appear superstitious ; but both he and she 
agree that she mentioned it as soon as the news of the death arrived,- 
which was about 6 weeks later ; the words " many months " in her 
account seem therefore to be a slip. 

Page 612, note. Omit 659, and add cases 30, 190, 198, 495, 530, 
537, 591. 

e 2 




1. AN issue has now to be seriously considered which I have 
several times referred to as a fundamental one, but which could 
not be treated without a preliminary study of the subject of sensory 
hallucinations. That, as I have tried to show, is the order of 
natural phenomena td which " phantasms of the living " in 
general belong ; they are to be regarded as projections of the 
percipient's brain by which his senses are deceived. We have 
further found that in a certain number of cases which may be 
taken as representing the still larger number to be cited in the 
following chapters a phantasm of this kind is alleged to have 
coincided very closely in time with the death, or some serious crisis 
in the life, of the person whose presence it suggested. The question 
for us now is whether these coincidences can, or cannot, be ex- 
plained as accidental. If they can, then the theory of telepathy 
so far as applied to apparitions falls to the ground. If they 
cannot, then the existence of telepathy as a fact in Nature is proved 
on the evidence ; and the proof could only be resisted by the 
assumption that the evidence, or a very large part of it, is in its 
main features untrustworthy. It is very necessary to distinguish 
these two questions whether the evidence may be trusted ; and if 
trusted, what it proves. It is the latter question that is now before 
us. The character of the evidence was discussed at some length in 
the fourth chapter, and is to be judged of by the narratives quoted 
throughout the book. In the present chapter it is assumed that 
these narratives are in the main trustworthy ; that in a large t 
proportion of them the essential features of the case i.e., two marked 
experiences and a time-relation between them are correctly recorded. 
Here, then, is the issue. A certain number of coincidences of a 
particular sort have occurred: did they or did they not occur by 



chance ? Now there are doubtless some who do not perceive that this 
question demands a reasoned examination at all. They settle it d 
priori. " One is constantly coming across very startling coincidences," 
they observe, " which no one thinks of ascribing to anything but 
chance; why should not these, which are no more startling than 
many others, be of the number ? " This idea need hardly detain us : 
the point in our cases is, of course, not that the coincidence is start- 
ling l that alone would be insignificant but that the same sort of 
startling coincidence is again and again repeated. That is clearly 
a fact which demands treatment by a particular method, often vaguely 
appealed to as " the doctrine of chances." The actual application of 
that doctrine, however, even to simple cases, seems to require more 
care than is always bestowed upon it. 

Especially is care required in the simple preliminary matter of 
deciding, before one begins to calculate, what the subject-matter of 
the calculation is to be what precise class of phenomena it is to 
which the doctrine of chances is to be applied. I need only recall 
Lord Brougham's treatment of his own case (Vol. I., pp. 396-7). His 
attempted explanation, as we saw, entirely depended on his miscalling 
his experience, and referring it to the class of dreams a class 
numerous enough, as he rightly perceived, to afford scope for numbers 
of startling coincidences. And his remarks illustrate what is really a 
very common outside view of psychical research. Dreams, and 
hallucinations, and impressions, and warnings, and presentiments it 
is held- are the " psychical " stock-in-trade ; and these phenomena 
are all much on a par, and may all be shown by the same arguments 
to be undeserving of serious attention. There has been the more 
excuse for this view, in that those who have claimed objective validity 
for what others dismiss as purely subjective experiences have often 
themselves been equally undiscriminating. Even this book might 

1 It is, however, something to get even the startling character of the coincidence 
admitted. For there are writers of repute who seem to think that the whole occurrence 
receives a sufficient rationalistic explanation when some plausible subjective cause for the 
hallucination has been suggested. The Abbe" de St. Pierre, after telling the well-known 
story of Desfontaines' appearance to his friend Bezuel, at the time of the former's death 
by drowning, and while the latter was apparently in a swoon, opines that the swoon was 
the cause of the apparition ; and Ferriar, who agrees with the Abbe' in this, and adds, " I 
know from my own experience that the approach of syncope is sometimes attended with 
a spectral appearance, " agrees with him also in leaving the little detail of the drowning 
wholly out of account. So with respect to the story told by Baronius, of the appearance 
of Ficino, at the time of his death, to Michael Mercato, who was studying philosophy. 
Ferriar (instead of making inquiry into the evidence of dates, which would show the story 
to be spurious) explains that Mercato's study of philosophy may have revived the idea of 
his friend in a vivid manner. It would certainly be a very vivid manner that could 
kill the friend at a distance. 


lead a critic who confined his perusal to the headings of the chapters 
to imagine that dreams form a corner-stone of the argument ; and in 
admitting that topic at all, we have so far laid ourselves open to 
misunderstanding. Thus a distinguished foreign critic of our efforts 
thought the subjective nature of what we regard as telepathic 
incidents sufficiently proved by the suggestion that " any physician 
will consider it quite within the bounds of probability that one per 
cent, of the population of the country are subject to remarkably vivid 
dreams, illusions, visions, &c,," and that each of these persons is 
" subject to a dream, or vision once a week." 1 It is obvious enough 
that in circles whose members have " spectral illusions " of their 
friends as often as once a week, the approximate coincidence of one of 
these experiences with the death of the corresponding person will be 
an insignificant accident. But we have not ourselves met with any 
specimen of this class ; and the present collection comprises first-hand 
accounts of recognised apparitions, closely coinciding with the death of 
the original, from 109 percipients, of whom only a small minority can 
recall having experienced even a single other visual hallucination than 
the apparition in question. 2 Once again, then, let me repeat that, 
though this work connects the sleeping and the waking phenomena in 
their theoretic and psychological aspects, it carefully and expressly 
separates them in their demonstrational aspect. The extent to which 
either class demonstrates the reality of telepathy can only be known 
through the application of the doctrine of chances ; but the application 

1 Another trap lies in the word hallucination (see Vol. i., pp. 458-9) ; which in 
this book is strictly limited to sensory affections, but which common usage often 
applies to purely mental errors. But for this Equivoque, an eminent physiologist would 
perhaps hardly have thought he made a point against us iu the remark a rather rash 
one from any point of view that our evidence is manifestly derived for the most part 
" from a class of persons given to hallucination, especially clergymen and women, who 
are naturally inclined to believe marvels." (Deutsche Rundschau for January, 1886, p. 45.) 
Among 509 informants from whom I have received accounts of apparently subjective 
hallucinations of sight and hearing, I find the proportion of females to males almost 
exactly 3 to 2, and clergymen most sparsely represented. Of the 527 percipients 
concerned in the hallucinations of sight and hearing which are included as telepathic 
evidence in these volumes, 241, or more than 46 per cent., are males ; 286, or less than 54 
per cent., are females ; and 28, or between 5 and 6 per cent., are ministers of religion. 
The slight preponderance of female informants may probably be due to their having, 
as a rule, more leisure than men for writing on matters unconnected with business. 

2 Explicit denials have been given by 73 out of the 10!). From 22 others no answer 
has been obtained on the point, either through our own failure at first to realise its 
importance, or owing to death or some unavoidable cause ; but of these 22, the majority 
have pretty clearly implied that what they describe was a unique experience. Of the 
14 who can recall some further instance or instances, 4 have had a single apparently 
subjective hallucination under exceptional conditions of bad health or mental strain ; 
3 have had one such experience when in a normal state ; and 7 have_ had several such 
experiences some of which, however, differed from the telepathic cases in not representing 
a living figure, while others were themselves either probably or possibly of telepathic 
origin. I may add that in a large number of other cases, not given in the actual words of 
the percipient, there is very good reason to believe the experiences to have been unique. 

VOL. II. B 2 


must be made to them separately, not together ; we must not, like Lord 
Brougham, argue to one class from the data of the other. I have already 
applied the doctrine to a particular class of dreams, with results 
which, though numerically striking, left room for doubt, owing to the 
peculiar untrustworthiness of memory in dream-matters. It remains 
to apply it to the waking phantasms; and here I think that the 
results may fairly be held to be decisive. 

2. It is clear that the points to be settled are two : the 
frequency of the phantasms which have markedly corresponded 
with real events ; and the frequency of phantasms which have had 
no such correspondence, and have been obviously and wholly 
subjective in character. These points are absolutely essential to 
any conclusion on the question before us ; and if not settled in any 
other way, they must be settled by guesses or tacit assumptions. 
The theory of chance-coincidence, as opposed to that of telepathy, 
has so far depended on two such assumptions. The first is that the 
coincidences themselves are extremely rare. They can then be 
accounted for as accidental. For we know that there are such things 
as hallucinations representing human forms, which do not correspond 
with any objective fact whatever outside the organism of the per- 
cipient ; and it would be rash to deny that the death of the person 
represented may now and then, in the world's history, have fallen 
on the same day as the hallucination. The second assumption is 
that these purely subjective apparitions of forms are extremely 
common. It can then be argued that even a considerable number 
of them might fall on the same day as the death of the corresponding 
human being. Supposing that we could each of us recall the occa- 
sional experience of gazing at friends or relatives in places which were 
really empty, then since people are perpetually dying who are the 
friends and relatives of some of us every year might yield a 
certain crop of the coincidences. 

But as soon as we make these assumptions explicit and look at 
them, we see how baseless and arbitrary they are. Why should 
either of them be admitted without challenge ? The second one 
especially seems opposed to what we may call the common-sense 
view of ordinary intelligent men. The question whether or not a 
very large proportion of the population have had experience of 
morbid or purely subjective hallucinations is one, I submit, where 
the opponents of the chance-theory might fairly take their stand 


on the ordinary observation of educated persons, and have thrown 
on others the onus of proving them wrong. On this point a broad 
view, based on one's general knowledge of oneself and one's fellows, 
does exist ; and according to it, " spectral illusions " distinct 
hallucinations of the sense of vision are very far from the everyday 
occurrences which they would have to be if we are to suppose that, 
whenever they coincide in time with the death of the person seen, 
they do so by accident. Nay, if we take even one of our critics, and 
bring him fairly face to face with the question, " If you all at once 
saw in your room a brother whom you had believed to be a hundred 
miles away ; if he disappeared without the door opening ; and if 
an hour later you received a telegram announcing his sudden death 
how should you explain the occurrence " ? he does not as a rule 
reply, " His day and hour for dying happened also to be my day and 
hour for a spectral illusion, which is natural enough, considering 
how common the latter experience is." The line that he takes is, 
" The supposition is absurd ; there are no really authentic cases of 
that sort." Under the immediate pressure of the supposed facts, he 
instinctively feels that the argument of chance-coincidence would 
not seem effective. 

Still, " common-sense" though it would support what I say 
is not here the true court of appeal. And, moreover, it is not unani- 
mous. On the second point, as on the first, I have received the most 
divergent replies from persons whom I have casually asked to give a 
guess on the subject ; and some have guessed the frequency of the 
purely subjective hallucinations as very much below what it actually 
is. The moral that we cannot advance a step without statistics 
seems pretty obvious, though the student of the subject may read 
every word that has ever been published on both sides of the 
argument without encountering a hint of the need. There is plenty 
of assertion, but no figures ; and a single instance, one way or the 
other, seems often to be thought decisive. To A, who has himself 
seen a friend's form at the time of his death at a distance, the 
connection between the two facts seems obvious ; B, having heard of a 
phantasm of a living person which raised apprehensions as to his 
safety, but which " came to nothing," is at once sure that A's case 
was " a chance." I have even seen this view expanded, and a lead- 
ing review gravely urging that the coincidences must be regarded 
as accidental, if against every hallucination which has markedly 
corresponded with a real event we can set another which has not. 


This is certainly a statistical argument of a sort and might be 
represented as follows: At the end of an hour's rifle-practice at 
a long-distance range, the record shows that for every shot that 
has hit the bull's-eye another has missed the target : therefore the 
shots that hit the bull's-eye did so by accident. 

3. Perhaps the neglect of statistics has in part been due to ail 
apparent hopelessness of attaining a sufficient quantity of reliable facts 
on which to found an argument to an idea that any census on which 
a conclusion could be founded would have to be carried out on a 
scale so vast as to be practically impossible. " Do you intend," I have 
been sometimes asked, "to ask every man and woman in England 
whether he or she has experienced any subjective hallucination 
during, say, the last twenty years, and also to get a complete record 
of all the alleged coincidences within the same period, and then to 
compare the two lists ? " Happily nothing at all approaching this is 
required. We shall find that approximately accurate figures are 
necessary only on one point the frequency of the subjective halluci- 
nations; and this can be ascertained by making inquiries of any 
fraction of the population which is large and varied enough to serve 
as a fair sample of the whole. Even this smaller task, however, is a 
very tedious one, consisting, as it does for the most part, in carefully 
registering negative information. The believer in telepathy may feel 
that he is doing much more to advance his belief by narrating a 
striking positive instance at a dinner party than by ascertaining, for 
instance, from twenty of his acquaintance the dull fact that they have 
never experienced a distinct visual hallucination. Just in the same 
way a scientific lecturer may win more regard at the moment by a 
sensational experiment with pretty colours and loud explosions than 
by laborious quantitative work in his laboratory. But it must be 
persistently impressed on the friends of " psychical research " that the 
laborious quantitative work has to be done ; and it is some satisfaction 
to think that the facts themselves may stand as material for others to 
deal with, even if the conclusions here drawn from them are incorrect. 

Nor has the dulness of the work been by any means the only diffi- 
culty : its purpose has been widely misconceived, and its scope has 
thereby been much curtailed. The proposal for a numerical estimate 
was introduced in a circular letter, every word of which might have 
been penned by a zealous sceptic, anxious above all things to prove 
that, in cases where the phantasm of a distant person has appeared 


simultaneously with the person's death, the coincidence has been an 
accidental one. Not a syllable was used implying that the authors of 
the letter had themselves any opinion as to whether phantasms to 
which no real event corresponds are or are not common things ; it 
was simply pointed out that it is necessary to have some idea how 
common they are, before deciding whether phantasms to which real 
events do correspond are or are not to be fairly accounted for by 
chance. And since sensory hallucinations, whatever their frequency, 
are at any rate phenomena as completely admitted as measles or 
colour-blindness, it did not occur to us that the following question 
could possibly be misunderstood : 

Since January 1, 1874, have you when in good health, 
free from anxiety, and completely awake had a vivid impression 
of seeing or being touched by a human being, or of hearing a 
voice or sound which suggested a human presence, when no one 
was there ? Yes or no ? l 

Clearly, the more yeses are received to this question i.e., the 
commoner the purely subjective hallucinations prove to be the 
stronger is the argument for chance as an adequate explanation of the 
instances of coincidence; the more noes the rarer the purely 
subjective hallucinations prove to be the stronger the argument 
that the death or other crisis which coincides with the apparition 
is in some way the cause of the apparition. We should have 
expected, if any injustice was to be done us, that it would have 
taken the form of attributing to us an inordinate desire for noes. 
To our amazement we found that we were supposed to be aiming 
exclusively at yeses and not only at yeses, but at yeses expanded 
into orthodox "ghost-stories" to be anxious, in fact, that every one in 
and out of Bedlam who had ever imagined something that was not 
there, or mistaken one object for another, should tell us his ex- 
perience, with a view that we might immediately interpret it as 
due to the intervention of a bogey. A more singular instance of 
the power of expectancy of the power of gathering from words any 

1 This comprehensive question has been actually asked in several parts. As first 
put, for example, it contained no limitation as to date-yas I was anxious to obtain 
accounts of as many hallucinations of the sane as possible ; and the fact that any 
experience recorded had or had not fallen within the specified period of 12 years was 
ascertained by subsequent correspondence. The details of the experience were also a- 
matter of subsequent inquiry. 

I need hardly warn the reader not to confound the group of hallucinations belong 
ing to the limited number of persons who were expressly asked the above question, with 
the large collection of similar experiences which has been frequently mentioned in some 
of the preceding chapters. That large collection includes the smaller group, and also 
census-cases which fell outside the 12 years' limit ; but it includes also a far larger 
number of cases which were received quite irrespectively of the census. 


meaning that a critic comes predisposed to find there can hardly 
be conceived. A statistical question on a perfectly well-recognised 
point in the natural history of the senses was treated, in scientific 
and unscientific quarters alike, as a manifesto of faith in " super- 
natural " agencies ; and we found ourselves solemnly rebuked for ignor- 
ing the morbid and subjective character of many hallucinations that 
is to say, for ignoring the fact which we had set forth as the very basis 
of our appeal, and from which its whole and sole point was derived. 
4. If I have dwelt thus on difficulties and misconceptions, it is 
not that I may boast of having altogether triumphed over them. On 
the contrary, they have made it impossible to attain more than a 
fraction of what I once hoped. I began with the idea that the 
census might be extended to 50,000 persons ; the group actually 
included numbers only 5705. Still, though this is certainly not a 
showy number, any one who is familiar with work in averages 
will, I think, admit that it is adequate for the purpose ; and the 
friends who have assisted in the collection of the answers (to whom 
I take this opportunity of offering my grateful thanks) need 
certainly not feel that their labour has been in vain. It is possible 
for a small group to be quite fairly representative. Thus, if 50 
males were taken at random from the inhabitants of London, if the 
heights of their respective owners were measured, and added together, 
and if the total were divided by 50, the result might be taken as 
representing, within extremely small limits of error, the average 
height of adult male Londoners; we should not get a much 
more correct result by taking the mean of 500, or 500,000 heights. 
This is the simplest sort of case. When it is a question of what 
proportion of the population have had a certain experience which 
many of them have not had, we must take a larger specimen- 
number, adjusting it to some extent by our rough previous know- 
ledge. For instance, if we want to know what proportion of the 
inhabitants of London have had typhoid fever, it would not be safe 
to take 50 of them at random, and then, if we found that 10 of 
these had had the illness, to argue that one-fifth of the inhabitants 
of London had had it. Our rough knowledge is that a great many 
have not had it, and that a good many have ; and in such circum- 
stances we should probably get a very appreciably more certain 
result by enlarging our representative group to 500. 1 If, again, the 

1 In the recently issued Supplement to the Registrar-General's Reports for 1870-80. 
he bases his conclusions as to the proportionate deadliness of different diseases in the 
various occupations on batches of 500-1000 deaths. 


experience was of extraordinary rarity, such as leprosy, the number 
of our specimen-group would have to be again increased ; even if we 
took as many as 500,000 people at random, that is about one-ninth of 
the population, and ascertained that one of them was a leper, it 
would not be safe to conclude that there were nine lepers in London. 
Now our rough knowledge as to hallucinations would place them in 
this regard very much more on a par with typhoid fever than with 
leprosy. We realise that a great many people have not had experience 
of them ; but we realise also that they are in no way marvellous or 
prodigious events. And if a group of 5705 persons seems a some- 
what arbitrary number by which to test their frequency, the view that 
it is too small and that 50,000 would be greatly preferable, is one 
that can at any rate hardly be held with consistency by advocates of 
the theory of chance-coincidence. For the main prop of that theory, 
as we have seen, is the assumption that purely subjective hallucina- 
tions are tolerably cdmmon experiences ; whereas it is only of 
decidedly rare experiences that the frequency, in relation to the 
whole population, would be much more correctly estimated from the 
proportion of fifty thousand people that have had them than from 
the proportion of five thousand people that have had them. How- 
ever, the adequacy of the latter number approves itself most clearly 
in the course of the census itself. We find as we go on that 
hallucinations are sufficiently uncommon to force us to take our 
specimen-group of persons in thousands, not in hundreds, but 
not so uncommon as to force us to take very many thousands : 
after the first thousand is reached the proportion of " yeses " to 
"noes" keeps pretty uniformly steady as would, no doubt, be 
the case if the question asked related not to hallucinations but to 
typhoid fever. 

As regards the sort of persons from whom the answers have 
been collected if there have been any answers from persons whose 
deficiencies of education or intelligence rendered them unfit subjects 
for a simple inquiry bearing on their personal experience, they form, 
I may confidently say, an inappreciable fraction of the whole. 
Perhaps a fourth of the persons canvassed have been in the position 
of shopkeepers and artisans or employes of various sorts ; but the_ 
large majority have belonged to what would be known as the 
educated class, being relatives and friends of the various collectors. It 
is, no doubt, safest to assume that a certain degree of education is a 
pre-requisite to even the simplest form of participation in scientific 


work ; and this condition, it will be observed, in no way detracts from 
the representative character of the group. A few thousand educated 
persons, taken at random, present an abundantly sufficient variety of 
types ; and, indeed, for the purpose in view, the group is the more 
truly representative for belonging mainly to the educated class, 
inasmuch as it is from that class that the majority of the cases 
which are presented in this work as probably telepathic are also drawn. 

5. To say, however, that the answers came in the main from an 
educated class, is not, of course, a guarantee of the accuracy of the 
census ; and before giving the actual results it may be well to 
forestall some possible objections. 

It may be said, to begin with, that people may have had the 
experience inquired about, but may have forgotten the fact. This 
is the objection which was considered above in respect of dreams of 
death, and which there seemed to have decided force. In respect of 
waking hallucinations of the senses, its force is very much less. No 
doubt hallucinations may exhibit all degrees of vagueness ; and it is 
very possible that extremely slight and momentary specimens may 
make little impression, and may rapidly be forgotten ; but for the 
purposes of the census it would not in the least matter that persons 
whose experience had been of this slight and momentary kind should 
answer no instead of yes. It would have been unwise to complicate the 
question asked by an attempt to define the extent of vividness that the 
hallucination must have reached, to be reckoned as an item in our 
census; but clearly the only subjective hallucinations of which it 
really concerns us to ascertain the frequency are those which are 
in themselves as distinct and impressive as the hallucinations that 
we represent as telepathic; and any that fall below this point of 
distinctness and impressiveness have no bearing on the argument. 
And, per contra, it will be seen that by not limiting the wording of 
the question to distinct and impressive hallucinations, the collector 
exposes himself to receiving the answer " yes " from persons whose 
hallucination actually was very vague and momentary, but who do, 
as it happens, remember its occurrence. In point of fact, this has 
occurred a good many times ; and the swelling of the list of yeses by 
this means probably outweighs any losses of what should have been 
genuine yeses through failure of memory. For consider what such 
failure of memory would imply. A fact of sight, hearing, or touch, 
as clear and unequivocal as most of the sensory impressions which 
we adduce as evidence for telepathy, must be very clear and 


unequivocal indeed. And the absence of the normal external cause 
of such an impression, when recognised, can hardly fail to give 
rise to genuine surprise the surprise that follows a novel and 
unaccountable experience : this has been the result of almost all 
the " telepathic " phantasms, quite independently of the news which 
afterwards seemed to connect them with reality. Now, can it be a 
common thing for an experience as unusual and surprising as this to 
be, within a dozen years or any shorter period, so utterly obliterated 
from a person's mind that his memory remains a blank, even when 
he is pointedly asked to try and recall whether he has had such an 
experience or not ? 

A second objection is this. It has been suggested that untrue 
answers may be given by persons wishing to amuse themselves at 
our expense. Now I cannot deny that persons may exist who would 
be glad to thwart us, and amuse themselves, even at the cost of 
untruth. But when the question is put, " Do you remember having 
ever distinctly seen the face or form of a person known to you, when 
that person was not really there ? " it is not at once obvious whether 
the amusing untruth would be " Yes " or " No." In neither case 
would the joke seem to be of a very exhilarating quality ; but, on the 
whole, I should say that " Yes " would be the favourite, as at any 
rate representing the rarer and less commonplace experience. " Yes " 
is, moreover, the answer which (as I have explained) it has been very 
generally thought that we ourselves preferred; so that to give it 
might produce a piquant sense of fooling us to the top of our bent. 
But the reader has seen that, so far as the census might be thus 
affected, it would be affected in a direction adverse to the telepathic 
argument ; for the commoner the purely casual hallucinations are 
reckoned to be, the stronger is the argument that the visions which 
correspond with real events do so by chance. And if the number of 
these coincident visions makes the chance-argument untenable, even 
when the basis of estimation is affected in the way supposed, a 
fortiori would this be the case if the yeses were reduced to their true 

Yet another objection is that persons who have had hallucinations 
may sometimes be disinclined to admit the fact, and may say " No " 
instead of "Yes" in self-defence. This source of error must be 
frankly admitted ; but I feel tolerably confident that it has not 
affected the results to a really detrimental extent. Any reluctance 
to give the true answer is, as a rule, observable at the moment ; and 


in most cases it disappears when the purpose of the census is 
explained, and careful suppression of names is guaranteed. And 
against this tendency to swell the noes may be set several reasons 
why, quite apart from untruth, a census like this is sure to produce 
an unfair number of yeses. Quite apart from any wish to deceive, the 
very general impression that yeses were what was specially wanted 
could not but affect some of the answers given, at any rate to the 
extent of causing indistinct impressions to be represented as vivid 
sensory experiences ; l and it has also led some of those who have 
aided in the collection to put the questions to persons of whom it was 
known beforehand that their answer would be yes. Moreover, 
when question-forms to be filled up are distributed on a large 
scale, it is impossible to bring it home to the minds of many 
of the persons whose answer would be " No " that there is any 
use in recording that answer. They probably have a vague idea 
that they have heard " negative evidence " disparaged, and fail 
to see that every percentage in the world involves it that we 
cannot know that one man in 100 is six feet high without 
evidence that 99 men in 100 are not six feet high. This difficulty 
has been encountered again and again ; and on the whole I have no 
doubt that the proportion of yeses is decidedly larger than it ought 
to be. Fortunately, incorrectness on this side need not trouble us 
its only effect being that the telepathic argument, if it prevail, will 
prevail though based on distinctly unfavourable assumptions. 

6. And now to proceed to the actual results of the census, and 
to the calculations based thereon. I will begin with auditory cases. 
Of the 5705 persons who have been asked the question, it appears 
that 96 have, within the last 12 years, when awake, 2 experienced an 
auditory hallucination of a voice. The voice is alleged to have been 
unrecognised in 48 cases, and recognised in 44, in 13 of which latter 
cases the person whose voice seemed to be heard was known to have 
been dead for some time. In the remaining 4 cases it has been 

1 For instance, a lady who answers that she has had an auditory hallucination, and is 
written to with the view of finding out in what it had consisted, then states that "it 
was not an auditory experience, but merely a feeling that something had happened." 
Here the answer could be rectified ; but even the many hundreds of letters that have 
been written on the subject have not served to eliminate all doubtful cases. 

2 I have not made a separate calculation for "borderland " cases; as the attempt to 
obtain separate statistics under that head would have complicated the census, and the 
only chance of carrying it through successfully was to keep it as simple as possible. 
The question as to hallucinations specially included the condition of being awake ; but 
naturally some of the experiences recorded had taken place when the hallucinated person 
was in bed (Vol. i., p. 393). I reckon these cases among the yeses ; and I include similar 
experiences in the group of coincidental hallucinations which appears later in the 


impossible to discover whether the voice was recognised or not ; the 
numbers being so even, I shall perhaps be justified in assigning 2 of 
these to one class, and 2 to the other. The computation will be 
clearer if we consider only the cases in which the voice was 
recognised, and the person whom it suggested was living ; these, then 
may be taken as 33, But, out of the 33 persons, 10 l profess to have 
had the experience more than once. Such cases of repetition, or at 
any rate most of them, might fairly have been disregarded ; for since 
the large majority of the persons who have had one of the coinci- 
dental hallucinations, which appear later in the calculation, can recall 
no other hallucination besides that one, I might in the same propor- 
tion confine the present list, which consists wholly of non-coincidental 
or purely subjective hallucinations, to similarly unique experiences, 
and leave out of account those occurring to people who seem rather 
more pre-disposed to such affections. However, in order to make 
ample allowance for the' possibility that the witnesses in the coinci- 
dental cases may have had subjective hallucinations which they have 
forgotten, let us take the repetitions into account ; and let us suppose 
each of the 10 persons just mentioned to have had 4 experiences 
of the sort within the specified 12 years. The most convenient 
way of making this allowance will be to add 30 to the former total 
of 33 i.e., to take the number of persons who have had the 
experience under the given conditions as 63. This amounts to 1 
in every 90 of the group of 5705 persons named, or (if that group 
be accepted as fairly representative of the population of this country) 
1 in every 90 of the population. 

Let us now see what the proportion of the population who have 
had such an experience ought to be, on the hypothesis that the 
similar impressions of recognised voices presented in this book as 
telepathic were really chance-coincidences. As before in the case 
of dreams (Vol. I., pp. 303-7), I take cases where the coincidence of 
the hallucination was with death the reasons for this selection being 

(1) that death is the prominent event in our telepathic cases ; and 

(2) that for the purpose of an accurate numerical estimate it is 
important to select an event of a very definite and unmistakeable 
kind, such as only happens once to each individual. Again also, in 
accordance with the official returns which give ^^ as the annual 
death-rate, the proportion of anyone's relatives and acquaintances 

1 Some of these cases were ciuite clearly " after-images " (see Vol. i., p. 502). One 
informant describes the impressions as very faint, and another experienced them only 
when over-tired. 


who die in the course of 12 years is taken as f^ ; and as we 
have seen (Vol. I., pp. 305-6), it will make no appreciable difference 
to the calculation whether a person's circle of relatives and acquaint- 
ances, the voice of any one of whom his hallucination may represent, 
is large or small. The probability, then, that a person hallucinated 
in the way supposed will, by accident, have his hallucination within 
12 hours on either side of the death of the relative or acquaintance 
whose voice it represents, is 1 in 12 x 3 | 6 5 4 X 100 , or 10 1 591 . That is 
to say, each coincidental hallucination of the sort in question implies 
16,590 purely subjective cases of the same type. Now our collection 
may be reckoned to include 13 first-hand and well-attested coinci- 
dental cases of this kind, which have occurred in this country within 
the specified time. 1 On the hypothesis, therefore, that these cases 
were accidental, the circle of persons from whom they are drawn ought 
to supply altogether, in the specified 12 years, 215,670 examples. 

The next point to decide is the size of the circle from which our 
coincidental cases are drawn. The number here is not one that it is 
possible to estimate accurately : what must be done, therefore, is to 
make sure that our margin is on the side adverse to the telepathic 
argument, i.e., to take a number clearly in excess of the true one. 
Our chief means of obtaining information has been by occasional 
requests in newspapers. A million-and-a-half would probably be 
an outside estimate of the circulation of the papers which have 
contained our appeals ; but it by no means follows that every para- 
graph in a paper is studied by every person, or by a tenth of the 
persons, whom the paper reaches. However, I will make the 
extreme assumption that as many as a quarter of a million of people 
have by this means become aware of the kind of evidence that 
was being sought an assumption which probably arrogates to us 
who sought it many times as much fame as we really possess ; and 
I will allow another 50,000 for those who have become aware of 
the object of our work through private channels. This would raise 
the number of the circle from whom our evidence is drawn to 
300,000, or about sV of the adult population. 2 No one, I think, 

1 Nos. 33, 158, 184, 190, 197, 272, 273, 278, 298, 300, 310, 340, 702. In one of these cases, 
No. 197, it is possible, on the facts stated, that the 12 hours' limit was slightly exceeded. 
I have not included case 613, as, though there were only a very few people by whom the 
percipient could have been addressed as "Pa," which was the word he heard and 
one of these died at the time at a distance, the father did not identify the voice with the 
particular son who died. 

2 In the "adult population"! mean to include all persons above 15 years of age. 
In the Supplement to the 45th Annual Report of the Registrar-General, p. xix., the 
proportion of such persons is given as '64 of the whole ; which would make their number 
about 24,000,000. 


will maintain on reflection, that I am taking too low an estimate. 
Would anyone, for instance, suppose that if he canvassed the first 
1000 adults whom he met in the streets of any large town, he would 
find that 12 or 13 of them had, within the last three years, been aware 
of what we wanted, and of the address to which information might be 
sent ? and for rural districts such a supposition would be even more 
violent. But I am further supposing that this area of 300,000 persons 
has been drained dry again an extravagant concession ; for though 
it is easily assumed that anyone who has ever had a " psychical " ex- 
perience is desirous to publish it abroad, as a matter of fact people do 
not usually take the trouble to write a letter about family and personal 
matters to perfect strangers, on the ground of a newspaper appeal ; 
and I have already mentioned that we ourselves know of much 
evidence which the reluctance or indiiference of the parties concerned 
has made unavailable for our collection ; we cannot, therefore, doubt 
that much more remains unelicited even among those whom our 
appeal has reached. A further strong argument for the existence 
of these unelicited facts is the very large proportion of our actual 
cases that has been drawn from a circle of our own, unconnected 
with "psychical" inquiry from the friends, or the friends' friends, 
of a group of some half-dozen persons who have had no such ex- 
periences themselves, and who have no reason to suppose their friends 
or their friends' friends better supplied with them than anybody else's. 1 
Here, then, is the conclusion to which we shall be driven, if our 
coincidental cases were really purely subjective hallucinations, and 
the coincidence was an accident : that in a circle of 300,000, within 
12 years, 215,670 subjective hallucinations of the type in question 
have taken place ; that is that, on an average, 7 persons in every 10 
have had such an experience within the time. But the result of the 
census above described showed the proportion to be 1 person in every 
90 only. Thus the theory of chance-coincidence, as applied to this 

1 An approximation to an estimate of the actual circle whom we have effectively 
reached may perhaps be made as follows : Of the 24 coincidental dreams of death, 
mentioned in Vol. i., p. 307, 4 were derived from a canvassed group of 53(50 persons ; 
of the 13 coincidental auditory hallucinations mentioned above, none were derived from 
the canvassed group of 5705 persons ; and of 27 coincidental visual hallucinations 
(of a definite type to be explained immediately), 1 was derived from a canvassed 
group of 5705 persons. Thus of 64 coincidental experiences of specified sorts, 5, or about 
one-thirteenth, were obtained by canvassing a body which (to take a mean) we may call 
5535 : we may surmise, then, that the circle from whom the whole number were drawn 
amounts to about 13 times 5535, or 71,955. This is no doubt a very rough calculation ; 
the number of coincidental (or, as we should say, telepathic) experiences yielded by a 
random group of 5535 persons being too small for us to be confident that it represents 
the average proportion in other groups of the same size. But the estimate is probably not 
so inexact but that it may safely be taken as showing the assumption of 300,000, made in 
the text, to be extravagantly unfair to the telepathic argument. 


class of cases, would require that the proportion of those who have not 
had, to those who have had, a subjective hallucination of a recognised 
voice should be 63 times as large as it has been shown to 
be ; that is, would require either that the subjective hallucinations 
should be 63 times as numerous as they actually are, or else 
that the circle from whom our coincidental cases are drawn should 
amount to 63 times the assumed size in other words, that our 
existence and objects should have been prominently before the 
minds of more than three-fourths of the adult population of the country ! 
Another form of the estimate is as follows. The probability that 
a person, taken at random, will, in the course of 12 years, have the 
form of hallucination in question is ^j; the probability that any 
assigned member of the general population, and therefore any 
particular person whose phantasmal voice is heard, will die within 
12 hours of an assigned point of time is \%m x vws', hence the 
probability that, in the course of 12 years, a hallucination of this 
form and the death of the person whose voice seems to be heard 
will fall within 12 hours of one another is ^j x iMu x ~5%5, or almost 
exactly 1 in 1,500,000. And the circle from which our coincidental 
cases are drawn is assumed to be 300,000. From these data it may 
be calculated that the odds against the occurrence, by accident, of as 
many coincidences of the type in question as that circle produced, are 
more than a trillion to 1. 

7. But the reductio ad absurdum becomes far more striking 
when we apply the doctrine of chances to visual cases. Out of the 
5705 persons taken at random, of whom the above question was asked, 
only 21 could recall having, in the conditions named and within the 
specified 12 years, experienced a visual hallucination representing a 
living person known to them. But two of the 21 had had 2 
experiences of the sort ; so let us take the total as 23. 1 That is, the 
experience has fallen to the lot of one 248th of the group of 
persons asked, or, if that group be fairly representative, to 1 person in 
every 248 of the population. 2 Now, just as before, each coincidental 

1 This is a liberal allowance ; for it includes several cases where there was such an 
amount of anxiety or expectancy on the part of the hallucinated person as would prevent 
us, if it were present in a coincidental case, from including such a case in our telepathic 
evidence. In 7 of the cases, the form seen was an "after-image " of what had been, for 
some time previously, part of the perceiver's daily visual experience. 

2 It will be seen that 1 in 248, though a small proportion, is yet quite large enough to 
make it likely that most of us should casually have heard of a case or two of the kind. 
For there are probably more than 248 persons whom we are each of us sufficiently near to 
make it natural that an unusual experience such as a distinct "spectral illusion^" 
befalling one of them, should directly or indirectly reach our ears. This is worth noting, 
because one sometimes hears the statement, " Why / heard the other day of a person 


hallucination of the sort in question, supposing it to have been 
purely subjective and the coincidence to have been accidental, should 
stand for 16,590 purely subjective hallucinations. But our collection 
includes 31 first-hand 1 and well-attested coincidental cases of this 
type, which have occurred in this country within the specified time ; z 
and the circle of persons from whom they were drawn liberally 
supposed, as before, to number 300,000 ought, therefore, to supply 
altogether, in the specified 12 years, 514,290 examples. That is to 
say, it ought to have happened on an average to everybody once, 
and to most people twice, within the given time, distinctly to see an 
absent relation or acquaintance in a part of space that was actually 
vacant. But the census has shown that, within the given time, only 
about 1 in every 248 persons has had such an experience even once. 
Thus the group of visual coincidental cases now in question, if ascribed 
to accident, would require either that the subjective hallucinations 
should be more than 396 times as numerous as they actually are ; 
or else that the circle from whom our coincidental cases are drawn 
should amount to more than 396 times the assumed size in other 
words, that our existence and objects should have been prominently 
before the minds of every adult member of a population 5 times as 
large as the existing one. 

The second form of estimate in the last section, applied to visual 
cases, will give as the probability that the hallucination and the 
death will fall within 12 hours of one another, 2 *- 8 x ^_ x _L_^ or 
1 in 4,114,545. And the circle from which our coincidental cases 
are drawn is assumed to be 300,000. From these data it may be 
calculated that the odds against the occurrence, by accident, of as many 
coincidences of the type in question as the 31 which that circle pro- 
duced, are about a thousand billion trillion trillion trillions to 1. 
Or, to put it in yet another way the theory of chances, which gives 1 
as the most probable number of coincidences of the type in question 
for every 4,114,545 of the population to yield, will give 6 as the most 

who had been disturbed by seeing an apparition of a friend, and nothing came of it," 
made as though it amounted to a proof that such experiences were common enough to 
afford scope for any number of marked coincidences. 

1 In 3 of the cases the evidence is not first-hand from the percipient, but is of the 
nature described in Vol. i., p. 148. 

2 Nos. 26, 27, 28, 29, 170, 172, 173, 174, 175, 182, 184, 195, 197, 199, 201, 202, 214, 231, - 
236, 237, 238, 240, 249, 298, 300, 350, 355, 695, 697, 702, and the case described in Vol. i.,p. 
130, note. As regards recognition, Nos. 170 and 355 do not stand on quite the same ground 
as the other cases. I am not reckoning case 241, where the recognition, such as it was, 
was retrospective ; nor case 500, where it seems at any rate as likely^ as not that the 12 
hours' limit was somewhat exceeded. In 3 cases, Nos. 197, 201, 231, it is possible, on the 
facts stated, that the limit was exceeded ; but in the two latter cases this is very impro- 
bable, and the coincidence may have been exact. 



probable number for the whole adult population to yield, within 
the given period. Yet we draw more than 5 times that number from 
a fraction of the adult population which can only by an extravagantly 
liberal estimate be assumed to amount to an 80th part of the whole, 
and which has been very inadequately canvassed. 

8. In the above estimates, I have allowed to the so-called 
coincidence the rather wide limit of 12 hours. But in most of the 
actual cases it has been much closer than this ; and it will be worth 
while to show how a single case of very close coincidence may 
legitimately strengthen the argument. First, it must be unre- 
servedly admitted that a single case, if it stood alone and no similar 
one had ever been heard of, would have no cogency whatever as 
evidence of the operation of anything beyond chance. The most 
extraordinary coincidence, as above remarked, may yet be totally 
insignificant. The a priori improbability that the tallest man of the 
century will be born during a transit of Venus is enormous ; but such 
a conjunction of events, if it happened, might be at once and with 
moral certainty ascribed to accident ; and with equal certainty might 
it be predicted that such a conjunction would never recur. And 
without resorting to imaginary examples, we often encounter 
conjunctions and coincidences which would have appeared, before 
they happened, to be extremely improbable, but the happening of 
which is none the less clearly accidental. The odds are very great 
against two of the foremost men in a century being born on the same 
day ; yet this happened in the case of Darwin and Lincoln, and no 
one imagines that one birth depended on the other. " Extraordinary 
coincidences " are, in fact, quite ordinary things ; and only when 
previous experience has given us ground for suspecting (however 
faintly) that the conjunction in time or special combination is due to 
some positive causal link, can we connect the a priori improbability 
of a new case with an a posteriori argument that cases of that 
type are not due to chance. 1 Now the result of 7 may be 

1 In a general way, coincidences where previous experience affords some ground for 
suspecting (however faintly) a cause other than chance are distinguished from coin- 
cidences where no such ground exists by this fact that the latter sort of cases, if 
d priori highly improbable, are not mentioned or described until after they have happened. 
From the mere fact that they do not belong to any known or surmised type, they do not 
enter into anyone's head : no one suggests, without any sort of grounds, that a particular 
thing will happen to some one at a particular time, or predicts any particular highly 
improbable coincidence, and then afterwards finds this thing or this coinci- 
dence actually occurring. Now it will scarcely be contended that the co- 
incidence of an apparition with the death of the person seen is a combination of events 
which has never entered anyone's head ; for it has entered the heads even of those who 
deny that it has ever occurred, or who ascribe its occurrence to accident. But the idea 
has of course had much more than this negative sort of existence ; there has been a 


summarised as follows. The census leads us to infer that, during 
the years 1874-85, out of 300,000 inhabitants of this country 
taken at random, w X 5 ' m or 1209 have had a recognised visual 
hallucination, representing a living person, which did not coin- 
cide with the death of that person. And during the same period, 
out of the same number of persons (supposing our inquiries really 
to have extended to so wide a circle,) at least 31 have had a 
recognised visual hallucination which did coincide in the sense of 
falling withing 12 hours of the death of the person seen. That is, out 
of 1209 + 31 or 1240 hallucinations, 31, or 1 in 40, have fallen within 
12 hours of the death of the person seen. Now let us apply this 
conclusion to case 28 (Vol. I., p. 210). When Mr. S. had his visual 
hallucination representing his friend, he would have been justified in 
regarding the probability that his friend would prove to have died 
within 12 hours of the vision as 1 in 40 ; whereas, if there was no 
ground at all for surmising that a causal connection may exist be- 
tween deaths and apparitions, he would only have been justified in 
regarding the probability of his friend's dying on that day as about 
1 in 20,440 estimated from the death-rate which tables of mortality 
give for men of his friend's age (48 years). But it will be observed 
that the death and the apparition, for aught we know, were abso- 
lutely simultaneous, and at any rate were within a quarter of an hour 
of one another. Since, however, the death may have occurred 12 
minutes before or 12 minutes after the apparition, we must 
take into account the double period ; or, to allow for difference 
of clocks, let us say half-an-hour. Now, on the supposition 
that telepathy is a reality in the world, closeness of coincidence 
rather increases than otherwise the probability that the death 
and the apparition in any particular case are causally connected ; 
whereas the probability of a death accidentally falling in a particular 
half-hour is, of course, 48 times less than that of its falling on a 
particular day. Thus the a priori probability that the death, if uncon- 
nected with the apparition, would fall in the particular half-hour in 
which the apparition fell, was 1 in 981,120 ; and in considering the 
question of connection, it is this extremely small degree of probability 
which has to be contrasted with the 1 in 40 which we have taken as . 

good deal of positive belief that such combinations occur, and that their occurrence implies 
a causal connection between the death and the apparition. And though this belief may 
have been rash and premature before the necessary statistics had been obtained, I have 
tried in the last two sections to show that it may now be justified by precise calculation. 

VOL. II. C 2 


about the true d priori probability that this particular half-hour 
would prove to be that of the death. 

But the significance of extreme closeness of coincidence may be 
yet more strikingly suggested, if we consider the probability of the 
joint event before either part of it has occurred. My census gives ais 
as the probability that a particular individual would within 12 years 
have a visual hallucination of a friend not known to be dead. Mr. S. 
has, say, x friends, of whom about a fourth would naturally die in 
this period ; and the period comprises 210,240 half-hours. Thus the 
probability of Mr. S.'s hitting off by chance such a coincidence as he 
did hit off was sla X i X f X 210> 1 240 , or about 1 in 208 millions. 1 
It might, I think, be safely said that, in the world's history, no one 
has ever contemplated the possible participation of himself, or of any 
other specified person, in an event of this degree of unlikelihood, and 
has afterwards found his idea realised. But apart from this, the points 
to be specially weighed are (1) that Mr. S.'s case was drawn from a very 
inconsiderable fraction of the population a fraction liberally estimated 
at 8*0 ; and (2) that this fraction of the population has supplied many 
other parallel instances of great closeness of coincidence. Taking only 
the "borderland" and waking phantasms recorded on first-hand testi- 
mony in the main body of this work, I find that 66 of them are repre- 
sented as having occurred within an hour of the event on the agent's 
side which event in 41 of the 66 cases was death; 15 more, according 
to the facts stated, were within two hours of the event, which in 10 of 
the 15 cases was death ; and in nearly all these cases, as well as in 
several others, it is quite possible that the coincidence was absolutely 
exact. I do not forget, what I have expressly pointed out in Chapter 
IV., that exaggeration of the closeness of the coincidence is a likely 
form for exaggeration in such matters to take ; 2 but in a considerable 

1 The denominator of the third of the four fractions which are multiplied together 
will diminish or increase according as the period considered is longer or shorter than 12 
years. Otherwise the length of the period is not material ; since the first fraction may 
be assumed to vary inversely with the last. 

The death, it will be observed, might happen in any half -hour ; and therefore the 
total of half-hours must be reckoned, without deduction of those in which a waking 
hallucination would be impossible as in sleep ; or of those in which it would be specially 
improbable ^as during conversation or active exercise. The case is like that of drawing 
two tickets simultaneously from two bags, one of which contains the numbers from 1 to 
100, and the other the numbers from 1 to 1000. The probability that the two tickets 
drawn will bear the same number is not y^ but WUT- I neglect the remote chance that 
several friends might die in one half -hour which, however, can be shown not to affect 
the result. 

- Thus it would be quite unjustifiable to add to the list a number of cases in the 
Supplement where the coincidence is stated to have been exact. Still the Supplement 
contains several accounts e.g., Nos. 508, 510, 569, 584, 599 which may fairly be assumed 
to be correct in this particular. 


number of the cases mentioned, good reason is shown for believing 
it to have been as close as is stated. 

But the huge total of improbability is nothing like complete. 
Nothing has been said of the aggregate strength of the cases where 
the phantasm was unrecognised. Nothing has been said of the large 
array of cases where the coincident event was not death, but some 
other form of crisis a class which does not lend itself easily to a 
precise numerical estimate, but whose collective force, even if it stood 
alone, would be very great. Once more, each of the two classes of 
cases the " reciprocal " and the " collective " which still await dis- 
cussion, includes specimens of visual and auditory phantasms ; and 
some of these afford an immensely higher probability for a cause other 
than chance, than the more ordinary cases where only one person is 
impressed. For the improbability of one sort of coincidence, that 
between B's unusual hallucination and A's condition has now to be 
multiplied by the improbability of another sort of coincidence, that 
between B's hallucination and a second unusual impression (whether a 
hallucination or of some other form) on the part of A or C. Nor 
even so will the argument for telepathic phantasms be nearly 
exhausted. For it will have been observed that throughout I have 
been taking into account nothing beyond the bare facts of the death 
and the hallucination, and altogether neglecting the correspondences 
of detail which in some cases add indefinitely, and almost infinitely, 
to the improbability of the chance occurrence. 

It would be very easy to amplify this reasoning, and to extend and 
vary the computations themselves ; but the specimens given are 
perhaps sufficient. They cannot possibly be made interesting ; but 
they are indispensable if the question is ever to be set at rest, and the 
appeal to the doctrine of chances to be anything better than empty 
words. Figures, one is sometimes told, can be made to prove 
anything ; but I confess that I should be curious to see the figures 
by which the theory of chance-coincidence could here be proved ade- 
quate to the facts. Whatever group of phenomena be selected, and 
whatever method of reckoning be adopted, the estimates founded on 
that theory are hopelessly and even ludicrously overpassed. With so 
enormous a margin to draw on, there is no particular temptation to. 
exaggerate the extent to which the evidence for the phenomena 
is to be relied on. In some cases it is possibly erroneous ; in many 
it is undoubtedly incomplete ; narratives may have been admitted 
which a more sagacious criticism would have excluded. But after 


all allowances and deductions, the conclusion that our collection 
comprises a large number of coincidences which have had some other 
cause than chance will still, I believe, be amply justified. 1 

9. But I have not yet done. There are considerations of a 
quite different kind which still further strengthen the argument for 
telepathy as against chance. At the close of the last chapter, I 
briefly referred to certain points of contrast between the telepathic 
and the purely subjective class of hallucinations. I have now to take 
up this thread and to show that, though the hallucinations which 
may be regarded as telepathic or veridical include many cases which 
may differ from purely subjective hallucinations of the sane only in 
the fact of being veridical, yet the group, as a whole, presents some 
well-marked peculiarities. 

The first of these peculiarities is the great preponderance 
of visual cases. Among hallucinations of the insane, the proportion 
of auditory to visual cases is often given as about 3 to 1 ; 
this estimate, however, seems to have been merely copied by 
one writer from another since the days of Esquirol ; and I am 
not aware that any statistics, on a large scale, have been obtained or 
published. Dr. Savage, however, tells me that he thinks that this is 
about the usual proportion at Bethlem Hospital ; and Dr. Lockhart 
Robertson writes to me, " Esquirol has put the proportion lower than 
I should do. I should say 5 to 1 at least ; auditory hallucinations 
are very frequent, visual rare." With respect to the transient hallu- 
cinations of the sane, so far as the results of my census are accepted, 
there is no doubt on the matter. We have seen that, out of 5705 
persons taken at random, 46 proved to have had, within the last 12 
years, an auditory hallucination of the " recognised " type, of whom 10 
had had the experience more than once ; and only 21 a visual one, 
of whom 2 had had the experience more than once. It becomes, then, 
at once a very remarkable fact that of the hallucinations which, with- 
in the same period, have coincided with real events, 31 should be 
visual, and only 13 auditory or 26 and 8, if we omit 5 which affected 
both senses ; while the whole collection of numbered cases in this work 
includes 271 phantasms which were visual without any auditory element, 
and 85 only which were auditory without any visual element. This 

1 I have given no separate estimate of the coincidental cases which happened before 
Jan. 1, 1874 ; as to do so would have been simply to reproduce the reasonings of 6 and 
7 with rather less striking results. Nor have I taken account of the experiences of 
foreigners, as these could not be brought into relation to statistics on subjective 
hallucinations belonging to this one country. But these further cases have a true 
force of their own, in indicating the general diffusion of the phenomena. 


difference would alone be a serious objection to explaining the coinci- 
dences as accidental. Nor could the advocates of the chance-theory 
fairly evade the objection by attributing the inversion of the ordinary 
proportion to faults of evidence. For why should evidence be faulty in 
this partial and one-sided way ? Why should people's memories deceive 
them more as to the fact of having seen something on a particular day 
than as to the fact of having heard something ? On the telepathic 
theory, on the other hand, the peculiarity seems to admit of explana- 
tion. The majority of the auditory cases, in transient hallucinations of 
the sane, are of hearing the name called, or of hearing some short 
familiar phrase ; and of such cases, as we saw above (Vol. I., pp. 
489-90), the most natural physiological explanation is that they are 
not produced by a downward stimulation from the higher tracts of 
the brain, but are due to a sudden reverberation at the sensory centre 
itself, which is readily excited to vibrations of a familiar type. The 
telepathic hallucinations; on the other hand, were traced (as far as 
their development in the percipient is concerned) to a stimulation 
passing downwards to the sensory centres from the higher or 
ideational tracts of the brain. There is, then, no difficulty in 
supposing that the auditory centre is more prone than the visual 
to spontaneous recrudescence of vibrations ; but that the downward 
excitation, which hurries ideas and images on into delusive sensory 
percepts, finds a readier passage to the visual centre than to the 
auditory or at any rate that, where the idea of a particular 
individual is to be abnormally embodied in a sensory form, it is 
more natural and direct to visualise it, in a shape that conveys 
his permanent personal attributes, than to verbalise it in some 
imagined or remembered phrase. 

A subordinate point, but one which is still worth noting, is that 
the proportion of cases where more senses than one have been con- 
cerned is considerably larger in the telepathic than in the purely 
subjective class of hallucinations which seems to imply what may 
be called a higher average intensity in the former class. Out of 590 
subjective cases, I find that 49, that is, a trifle over 8 per cent, of the 
whole number, are alleged to have concerned more senses than one ; 
of which 24 were visual and auditory, 8 visual and tactile, 13 auditory 
and tactile, and 4 concerned all three senses. Taking the telepathic 
evidence, I find that, out of 423 cases where a sensory hallucination 
seems to have been distinctly externalised, 80, or 19 per cent, of the 
whole number, are alleged to have concerned more senses than one ; 


of which 53 were visual and auditory, 13 visual and tactile, 6 auditory 
and tactile, and 8 concerned all three senses. I may add that the 
proportion of 19 per cent, remains exactly the same if only the 
first-hand cases included in the body of the work be taken into 
account, and cannot therefore be attributed to exaggeration of the 
facts in those narratives in the Supplement which are given at 
second-hand. 1 

The next distinguishing mark of the class of phantasms which 
have coincided with real events is the enormous proportion of them in 
which the figure or the voice was recognised. In the purely subjec- 
tive class of transient hallucinations of the sane, the recognised and 
unrecognised phantasms seem to be about equal in number. Thus, 
if we confine ourselves to cases where a human presence was 
suggested, of the canvassed group of 5705 persons, 17 had seen 
unrecognised figures, to 21 who had seen recognised ones; and 50 
had heard unrecognised voices, to 46 who had heard recognised ones. 
Of the visible phantasms described in this work as probably tele- 
pathic, which represented human forms or faces without any sound 
of a voice, 237 have been recognised, and only 13 unrecognised. 
Of the phantasms described in this work as probably telepathic, which 
consisted simply of voices uttering words, 36 have been of a recog- 
nised and 21 of an unrecognised voice ; but among these 211 include 6 
cases where the words heard were as closely associated with the agent as 
if the tone had been his, since they actually named him ; and a seventh 
where a place specially connected with him was named. Out of 38 cases 
which included both a form and a voice, the phantasm was unrecognised 
in only 2. It may be said that the fact of recognition is the very 
fact which has led us to refer the phantasm to the telepathic class, 
and that therefore it is no wonder if the recognised phantasms 
preponderate in our evidence. But this is not what has happened. 
Important as the recognition is, and greatly as the lack of it detracts 
from the evidential force of a case, it is the coincidence, not the 
recognition, that we have throughout regarded as the main point ; 
and cases have never been suppressed for lack of recognition alone, 
provided the coincidence was close non-recognition being easily 
explicable on the view of telepathic hallucinations above propounded 

1 If only the subjective cases received from the canvassed group of 5705 persons be 
considered, those which concerned more than one sense amount to less than 4 per cent. ; 
while of the 40 special coincidental cases enumerated in p. 14, first note, and p. 17, second 
note, 8, that is 20 percent., concerned more than one sense or 17| per cent, if we exclude 
one case, No. 199, where it is not quite certain that what was heard was not a real sound. 


(Vol. I., pp. 539-40). The fact is simply that we have received com- 
paratively few cases of unrecognised phantasms of human figures or 
voices which have closely coincided, and afterwards been associated, 
with some marked event closely affecting the percipient ; and those 
which we have received, on trustworthy authority, have been 
included in our collection. And if it be further suggested that the 
persons concerned are themselves little likely to remark the coinci- 
dence, if the phantasmal form or voice was not recognised, my 
reply is (1) that this seems a very sweeping assumption ; and (2) 
that so far as it is valid as an argument, it implies the existence 
of a large number of unnoted cases, over and above those which it 
is possible to collect, of those very coincidences whose perpetual 
repetition is already such a mountainous obstacle to the theory that 
they occur by chance. 1 

Further knowledge may possibly bring to light other points in 
which the hallucinations that have corresponded with real events 
taken in their immediate aspect as phenomena and quite apart from 
this correspondence may be distinguished from the general body 
of transient hallucinations of the sane. And while the resemblances, 
brought out in the two preceding chapters, between the coincidental 
and the non-coincidental or purely subjective experiences, were 
sufficient, I think, to show that the coincidental cases are truly 
hallucinations of the percipient's senses, clearly every feature which 
can be named as distinguishing these hallucinations, every feature 
which tends to separate them off as a restricted group thereby 
increases the difficulty of attributing the correspondences to 

The last point to which I must call attention, as conflicting with 

1 It may still be thought that the visual and the recognised phantasms are at any 
rate more interesting than the auditory and the unrecognised, and that that is a reason 
for their preponderating among the telepathic cases that we have received. I would 
admit this to some extent. That some difference in the record is made by the superior 
interest of visual and of recognised phantasms, may be argued from the numbers in 
my total collection of hallucinations, putting aside those presented as telepathic evidence. 
Thus, in spite of the visual hallucinations being shown, by the canvassing of a limited group 
of persons, to be the rarer phenomena, I have a total of 311 visual cases to only 187 
auditory a fact, by the way, which may suggest how Krafft-Ebing (Die Sinnesdelirien, 
p. 32), CJriesinger (Die Pathologic und Tkerapie der Psychischen Krankheiten, p. 100) and 
Wundt (Grundzuge der Physiploqischen Psychologic, vol. ii., p. 353) have been led into 
asserting that the visual class is the more numerous. Again, among cases where a human 
presence was suggested, in spite of the recognised and unrecognised classes being shown, 
by the canvassing of a limited group of persons, to be about equal, I have 172 visual 
examples of the recognised sort to only 116 of the unrecognised, and 82 auditory examples 
of the recognised sort to only 64 of the unrecognised. Still, remembering that the 
vitally interesting point in the coincidental cases is, after all, the coincidence, and not the 
mere form of the phantasm, the allowance which may thus be fairly made cannot, I think, 
suffice to explain the proportions given in the text. 


the theory of chance-coincidence, is a characteristic not of the 
telepathic phantasms themselves, but of the distant events with 
which they and other telepathic impressions coincide ; but it none the 
less serves to distinguish these coincidences as due to a definite and 
peculiar cause. It is the very large proportion of cases in which 
the distant event is death. 1 It is in this profoundest shock which 
human life encounters that these phenomena seem to be oftenest 
engendered ; and, where not in death itself, at least in one of those 
special moments, whether of strong mental excitement or of bodily 
collapse, which of all living experiences come nearest to the great 
crisis of dissolution. Thus among the 668 cases of spontaneous 
telepathy in this book, 399, (or among 423 examples of the sensory ex- 
ternalised class, 303,) are death-cases, in the sense that the 
percipient's experience either coincided with or very shortly followed 
the agent's death ; while in 25 more cases the agent's condition, at 
the time of the percipient's experience, was one of serious illness 
which in a few hours or a few days terminated in death. Nor, in 
this connection, can I avoid once more referring to the large number 
of cases in which the event that befell the agent has been death 
(or a very near approach to it) by drowning or suffocation. Out 
of the 399 death-cases just mentioned, there are 35, or nearly 9 per 
cent., where the death was by drowning, clearly a very much higher 
proportion than deaths of this particular form bear to all deaths, 
for even of accidental deaths among the male population, only 5 per 
cent, are due to drowning and in 6 other cases the agent's escape 

1 The point is one to which I have adverted in connection with dreams(Vol. i., pp. 308-10). 
But there we saw a certain force in the objection that the coincident dream of death might 
get remembered just by virtue of the coincidence, while other equally vivid dreams of 
death might be forgotten. Let us see what would be implied if a similar supposition were 
made in the case of the waking-hallucinations. Taking the number of adults in the 
country as 24 millions, then, even on the extravagant assumption which I made as to the 
size of the area from which our cases are drawn, the probable number of coincidental 
phantasms for the United Kingdom, during the last 12 years, amounts to as many as 32 x 
80, or 2560. Now the census gives i4 W^U>, or 96,744, as the number of persons in the 
United Kingdom who, on being asked, would remember having had a purely subjective 
visual hallucination of this type. Therefore, if these were all the hallucinations that 
had occurred, 1 in every 38 of them would correspond with the death of the person whose 
figure appeared ; that is to say, for each hallucination, the probability that it would 
coincide with the death would be 1 in 38. Now for each of the remembered hallucina- 
tions we found the probability of the accidental occurrence of the coincidence to be 
nriffT- We thus arrive at the total which the purely subjective hallucinations, 
remembered and unremembered, will have to reach in order to bring the probability 
of an accidental coincidence up to -^ : they will have to be altogether "'jfe 91 or 436 
times as numerous as the remembered cases. But as 1 person in 248 remembers a case, 
this will mean either that nearly every sane and healthy adult in the country, while 
awake, has seen a phantasm representing a living acquaintance twice within the last 12 
years, or that a very large proportion of them have seen such a phantasm more than 
twice ; and that 435 out of every 436 of these startling experiences have been totally 
forgotten by the persons affected. 


from such a death was a narrow one. 1 And if we do not insist on 
the form of death, but only on its suddenness, the above proportion still 
remains a very striking fact ; since deaths by accident, even among 
males, are only a little over 4 per cent, of the total of deaths. 

We do not know why the conditions of death generally, or 
of sudden death, or of any particular form of death, 2 or of excite- 
ment or collapse, should be effective ; but we at all events know 
that the conditions are themselves unusual. Similarly in most 
cases of experimental thought-transference, the agent's mind is 
unusually occupied by its concentrated fixation on a single object ; 
and whether it be in the curiosities of an afternoon or in the crises 
of a lifetime that telepathy finds its occasion, the peculiarity of the 
agent's state has at any rate that degree of explanatory power which 
succeeds in connecting the rare effect with the rare cause. In neither 
case can we trace out the actual process whereby the percipient is 
influenced ; but we have the same sort of ground for refusing to 
attribute to chance the oft-repeated apparitions at the time of death, 
as the oft-repeated successes in guessing cards and reproducing 

The only way of meeting this argument would be to show that 
similar coincidences have been frequently met with in connection 
with definite events which produced no unusual physical or mental 
state in the person to whom they occurred. For instance, if B at a 
distance has a vision of A on the day that A scratches his finger or 
orders a new pair of boots, it would seem wholly irrational to connect 
the two facts. Accordingly, if many, or even several, such coincidences 
were on record, I should have to admit that the operations of chance 
altogether overpass my estimate, and that the data on which the 
previous argument rested must, therefore, be somehow defective. 
Or, to take a case where some emotional disturbance is, as & rule, 
involved, if it proved to be not extremely uncommon to have a 
vision of an absent friend on the morning of his marriage, I should 
feel that my argument was so far weakened ; for it would be 
difficult to suppose that the emotions connected with that one 

1 NOB. 48, 59, 60, 105, 138, 159, 165, 188, 236, 281, 282, 297, 341, 349, 416, 487, 513, 
525, 528, 529, 535, 536, 537, 540, 541, 559, 570, 581, 582, 583, 596, 600, 603, 608, 636, 648, 
659, 662, 664, 674, 675. I have explained (Vol. i., pp. 335-6) that cases are not. 
admitted as evidence where the percipient's experience might be attributed to his own 
state of apprehension as to the agent's fate. 

2 At the same time, with respect to drowning, one cannot but recall the peculiar 
vividness and concentration of psychical life which (from the accounts of many persons 
who have been ultimately rescued) seem to characterise the earlier stages of that form 
of death. 


morning stood distinctly apart from those of other seasons dedi- 
cated to happiness and the affections. 1 But in point of fact we do 
not find that coincidences of these types prevail. The coincidental 
phantasms seem limited to seasons of exceptional crisis or excite- 
ment on the agent's part ; and this limitation , in once more 
marking out these phantasms as a distinct group of natural pheno- 
mena, strongly confirms the substantial accuracy of the statistical 

I am not forgetting, in these final remarks, what I have expressly 
stated before (Vol. I., p. 97), that the action of telepathy must not be 
dogmatically confined to those examples of striking coincidence which 
are suitable to be quoted in demonstration of it ; and even in respect 
of such extreme affections as hallucinations of the senses, I should 
hesitate to assert that they cannot be due to an absent agent whose 
condition is not markedly abnormal. 2 I regard it, however, as so 
unlikely that this is often their source I regard the probability as so 
enormous that a phantasm seen or heard by A only, and representing 
B who is at the time living a piece of ordinary life, is of purely 
subjective origin that the above argument remains in my view a 
fair one ; and it is at any rate fairly addressed to those (whom of 
course I have had chiefly in view throughout the present chapter) 
who have not hitherto admitted or considered the case for telepathy 
even as based on the markedly coincidental examples. 

1 In accordance with this view, and in the absence of very special details, we 
should feel bound to exclude from our evidence, as an "ambiguous case," any stray 
coincidence of the sort that we encountered. The following is an instance : 

Miss Keith Bremner, daughter of Captain Bremner, the chief constable of Fif eshire, 
was sitting at the window of the dining-room in the forenoon (precise hour forgotten) of 
the 18th June, 1884, when looking out of the window she saw, in a flower-bed about 20 
feet distant, what seemed to her the face of Mary D., growing out of a yellow pansy. 
The face was quite distinct and life-like, and seemed to be laughing as it looked at her. 
Miss Bremner is quite certain that what she saw was not merely a fancied resemblance in 
one of the flowers to Miss D.'s face. The face was too clearly and distinctly seen for 
that. Moreover, it seemed to be of the size of life. There could have been no mistake 
about it. Miss Bremner did not look long. She turned away, and the face was gone 
when she looked again. Later in the day she told her mother what she had seen, and 
Mrs. Bremner remarked, "I wonder when Mary D. will be married ; it should be about 
this time." They heard afterwards that Miss D. had actually been married on that day, 
and at about the time when Miss Bremner saw the apparition of her. Miss Bremner has 
never had any other hallucination of the senses. 

This account was written down by Mr. Podmore after an interview with Miss 
Bremner, and submitted to her. She writes : 

" The above account correctly describes what I saw. KEITH BREMNER." 
Mrs. Bremner wrote from Sandilands, Cupar, Fife, on September 22nd, 1884 : 
"Mrs. Bremner begs to inform Mr. Podmore that her daughter told her immediately 
she saw the face in the pansy. Mr. Podmore's written statement is quite correct. 
The wedding took place on Wednesday, the 18th of June." 

5 See, for example, the cases in Chap, xiv., 7. 




1. IN Chapter XII., a good many specimens of telepathic phantasms 
were quoted, in illustration of certain special points ; and particularly 
as showing what part in the phenomena we may attribute to the 
obscure action of the agent's and of the percipient's mind respec- 
tively, and how the original impulse may become modified in transitu. 
A still larger number of cases remain, of which only a few present speci- 
ally noticeable characteristics of dress, or development, or phantasmal 
imagery ; but which have their share with the others in the cumu- 
lative proof of telepathy, and include moreover several fresh features 
and types. The present chapter will be devoted to visual examples. 
In the " General Sketch of Hallucinations " (Vol. I., pp. 480-3 
and 488), I mentioned the various degrees of externalisation 
that the phenomena may present ; beginning with the ideal picture 
which is not a sensory hallucination at all which is realised as 
a purely internal impression, as seen by the " mind's eye " ; and 
ending with the actual percept, which, though equally the product 
of the percipient's mind, seems to take its place in the external 
world on a par with all the other objects within his range of 
vision. Now between these first and last stages there seems a wide 
gap; and if our review of telepathic incidents had to pass at one 
step from the vivid pictures flashed from mind to mind, to the 
phantasmal figure "out in the room," there might be a certain 
difficulty in conceiving two such different-seeming phenomena as 
having a similar origin. It is satisfactory, then, to be able to point 
to several intermediate stages. That such stages are found in the 
telepathic, as well as in the purely subjective or pathological, class of 
phantasms, is only a fresh indication that telepathic phantasms, in 
spite of their peculiar origin, are worked (so to speak) by the ordinary 
mechanism of hallucination. 


I may first quote a case which shows how the percipient may him- 
self be doubtful as to the degree of externality that the phantasmal 
appearance had. In the summer of 1884, Mr. Henry H. Ho worth, 
M.P., of Eccles, Manchester, filled up a question-form with the 
information that one morning, in 1857, he had a visual hallucination 
representing a great-uncle ; and added : 

(218) "My great uncle died at the very time; and someone came to 
bring me home from school, where I then was. I don't think I was at all 
excitable or impressionable. My uncle was a very unlikely person for me 
to have thought about. He had been for years troubled with gout of a 
chronic type, but was otherwise hearty and well, and to a boy had the 
appearance of robust health. He was much attached to my mother and 
her children. 


Recounting the same incident on December 2nd, 1885, Mr. Ho worth 
wrote : 

" I was a young boy about 12 years old, and at school at Whalley, 
when I felt an overpowering sense that something very serious had hap- 
pened to my great-uncle, who had been a foster-father to my mother, and 
was much attached to me. The same day someone came to fetch me home, 
as he had died. When you look across a gap of 30 years, memory is 
blunted as to details, and I cannot pretend to fill in the story. I never 
remember having a similar visitation." 

On my pointing out that the second account differed from the first in 
making no mention of any visual experience, Mr. Howorth wrote : 

" I could not say at this distance of time whether the experience I had 
was visual or mental merely, for the distinction in the case of a boy would 
perhaps not be marked in the memory. I can only say the impression was 
a very vivid and sharp one." 

I should regard this indistinctness of memory as a tolerably sure 
sign that the impression was not of the truly sensory (that is, of 
the most unique and startling) sort, but rather a vivid mental 
picture of the type noticed in Vol. L, p. 209, and further exemplified 
in the 6th chapter. In the stage next above this, the observer may 
still find it hard to say whether what impresses him is purely ideal, 
or whether his sense-organs are partly concerned there being a sense 
of externality, but not exactly a projection into the surrounding 
world. Case 66 (Vol I., p. 267) was really an example in point the 
scene having apparently been something more than a vivid mental 
picture but not confounded with the objective world, or located in 
the actual place where the percipient was at the time. Very similar is 
an experience which befell a master at a large public school, in the 


summer of 1874 or 1875. Having been detained at home while a 
party of boys, accompanied by some masters and ladies, made a 
steamer excursion, he was, he says, 

(219) " Standing vacantly at the door of his house, doubtless thinking of 
the absentees and conjecturing how they were then employed. Suddenly he 
seemed to see a boy slip, when crossing the landing stage from the quay to 
the vessel, and fall into the water, wounding his mouth as he fell. There 
the vision ended. Mr. A. [the narrator] returned to his work, in which he 
was absorbed, until the return of Mrs. A. ; but so vivid was the impression 
on his mind of the reality of the occurrence that he had looked at his 
watch and noted the time exactly. 

" On his wife's return Mr. A. at once said to her, ' Did you get that 
boy out of the water ? ' 

" ' Oh, yes ; there was no harm done beyond the fright. But how 
should you know anything about it ? I am the first to arrive ; they are 
walking. / drove.' 

" ' Well, how about his lip ? Was it badly cut 1 ' 
" ' It was not hurt at all ; you know X. has a harelip.' 
" Mr. A. has no explanation to offer : these are the facts." 
[Mr. A. was under the impression that the coincidence was precise. 
But the time of the vision was about 7 p.m. ; and we learn from 
the wife of the head-master, who was present, that the accident occurred 
before luncheon ; therefore, if telepathic, the case was one of the deferred 
class. This lady remembers that some of the party were afraid that the 
boy had cut his face, till the fact of the harelip was recalled. If we 
suppose the agent to have been Mrs. A., then the impression of the scene 
(as in the somewhat similar dream-case, No. 101) would seem to have 
been transferred, so to speak, ready-made and to have received no 
development from the percipient.] 

The following case, though undoubtedly sensory, seems still to 
belong to a somewhat indescribable stage of visualisation. If 
interpreted as telepathic, it is further of interest as illustrating that 
rarer type where the phantasm is not merely representative of the 
agent, but visibly reproduces some actual percept or idea which is 
prominently present at the time to the agent's consciousness (see 
Chap. XII., beginning of 5). The account is from Mr. F. Gottschalk, 
of 20, Adamson Road, Belsize Park, N.W., and is dated Feb. 12, 1886. 

(220) Mr. Gottschalk begins by describing a friendship which he 
formed with Mr. Courtenay Thorpe, at the rooms of Dr. Sylvain Mayer, 
on the evening of February 20th, 1885. On February 24th, being anxious 
to hear a particular recitation which Mr. Thorpe was shortly going to give, 
Mr. Gottschalk wrote to him, at the Prince's Theatre, to ask what the" 
hour of the recitation was to be. " In the evening I was going out to 
see some friends, when on the road there seemed suddenly to develop 
itself before me a disc of light, which appeared to be on a different plane to 
everything else in view. It was not possible for me to fix the distance at 


which it seemed to be from me. 1 Examining the illumined space, I found 
that two hands were visible. They were engaged in drawing a letter from 
an envelope which I instinctively felt to be mine and, in consequence, 
thought immediately that the hands were those of Mr. Thorpe. I had not 
previously been thinking of him, but at the moment the conviction came to 
me with such intensity that it was irresistible. Not being in any way 
awe-struck by the extraordinary nature and novelty of this incident, but 
in a perfectly calm frame of mind, I examined the picture, and found that 
the hands were very white, and bared up to some distance above the wrist. 
Each forearm terminated in a ruffle ; beyond that nothing was to be seen. 
The vision lasted about a minute. After its disappearance I determined 
to find out what connection it may have had with Mr. Thorpe's actual 
pursuit at the moment, and went to the nearest lamp-post and noted the 

" By the first post the next morning, I received an answer from Mr. 
Thorpe, which began in the following way : ' Tell me, pray tell me, why 
did I, when I saw your letter in the rack at the Prince's Theatre, know 
that it was from you ? ' [We have seen this letter, which is dated " Tues- 
day night "; and February 24th, 1885, fell on a Tuesday.] Mr. Thorpe 
had no expectation of receiving a letter from me, nor had he ever seen my 
writing. Even had he seen it, his knowledge of it would not affect the 
issue of the question, as he assured me that the impression arrived the 
moment he saw there was a letter under the 'T clip,' before any writing 
was visible. [Mr. Gottschalk explains that from the construction of the 
rack, which he has examined, the address on the envelope would be invisible.] 

" On the evening of February 27th, by arrangement, I again met him 
at the rooms of Dr. Mayer, and there put questions to him with a view to 
eliciting some explanation. As near as possible, I give them as they were 
put at the time, and add the answers. It is necessary for me here to 
state that he and the Doctor were in complete ignorance of what 
had happened to me. Having first impressed upon him the necessity 
of answering in a categorical manner and with the greatest possible 
accuracy, I commenced : 

" ' When did you get my Tuesday's letter ? ' ' At 7 in the evening, 
when I arrived at the theatre.' ' Then what happened 1 ' ' I read it, but, 
being very late, in such a hurry that when I had finished I was as ignorant 
of its contents as if I had never seen it.' ' Then ? ' 'I dressed, went on 
the stage, played my part, and came off.' ' What was the time then ? ' 
' About 20 minutes past 8.' ' What happened then ? ' 'I talked for a 
time with some of the company in my dressing-room.' ' For how long ? ' 
' Twenty minutes.' ' W T hat did you then do ? ' ' They having left me, my 
first thought was to find your letter. I looked everywhere for it, in vain. 
I turned out the pockets of my ordinary clothes, and searched among the 
many things that encumbered my dressing-table. I was annoyed at not 
finding it immediately, especially as I was anxious to know what it was 

1 Cf. a remark in M. Marillier's account of his interesting subjective experiences, 
referred to in Vol. i., p. 521 : " Je ne pourrais indiquer ni la place de I'image que j'ai 
objectivee, ni la distance a laquelle elle se trouve." The indescribableness of a certain sort 
of externalisatipn is well brought out in the same writer's description of his_ vision of parts 
of his body which could never actually be seen by him e.g., the back of his head. 


about. Strangely enough I discovered it eventually in the coat which I 
had just worn in the piece " School for Scandal." I immediately read it 
again, was delighted to receive it, and decided to answer at once.' ' Now 
be very exact. What was the time when you read it on the second 
occasion ? ' ' As nearly as I can say 10 minutes to 9.' 

" Thereupon I drew from my pocket a little pocket-diary in which I 
had noted the time of my vision, and asked Dr. Mayer to read what was 
written under the date 24th February. 

" ' Eight minutes to 9.' 

[Mr. Gottschalk has kindly allowed us to inspect his diary, which 
confirms all the dates given.] 

" Having established in this way, without any assistance, the coin- 
cidence of time between his actually opening the envelope and my 
seeing him do so, I was satisfied as to the principal part, and 
proceeded to analyse the incident in detail. The whiteness of the hands 
was accounted for by the fact that actors invariably whiten their hands 
when playing a part like the one Mr. Thorpe was engaged in ' Snake ' in 
the ' School for Scandal.' The ruffles also formed part of the dress in this 
piece. They were attached to the short sleeves of the shirt which Mr. 
Thorpe was actually wearing when he opened my letter. 

" This is the first hallucination I ever had. I have had one since of a 
similar nature, which I will recount separately. 


Dr. Mayer, of 42, Somerset Street, Portman Square, W., corroborates 
as follows : 

"March 1, 1886. 

" I well remember having read something [i.e., in Mr. Gottschalk's 
diary] the exact words memory will not allow me to give which tallied 
almost exactly with the story told by Courtenay Thorpe ; and can bear 
positive testimony of the above conversation having taken place. 


[We cannot lay any stress on Mr. Thorpe's impression as to the letter 
and its writer, since that may easily have been accidental. But it is a 
point to be noticed that he read the letter with very decided pleasure, after 
a considerable hunt for it in other words, that the reading of the letter 
stood out rather distinctly from the general run of such experiences. 
Though the incident is trivial, the close correspondence of time and detail 
is strongly suggestive of telepathic clairvoyance. In the second case 
mentioned, an illuminated disc was again seen, which " seemed not to 
belong to the surroundings " ; but the details were not quite as distinctive 
as in the above instance.] 

The fragmentary nature of the hallucination in this case has 
parallels, as we have seen, in the purely subjective class. 1 The " disc 
of light " is also to be noticed. (See Chap. XII., 7, and compare the 

1 Vol. i. p. 504. The case in the Phrenological Journal, referred to below (p. 38, 
note), included visions of parts of figures, faces, half-faces, and limbs. There are many 
degrees of incompleteness. Thus, one of my correspondents, when out of doors, was 
startled by the sight of a man whose bearded face was clearly distinguished, but whose 
form stopped short at the knees ; another, on waking, saw "a shadow bending over her, 
but with a face that was distinct. A very interesting case is that of the quarter-length Mr. 



" bright oval" in Vol. I., p. 503, the "large flickering oval," p. 176, and 
the face " in the centre of a bright, opaque, white mass," in case 184. 
The exact description a " disc of light " recurs in the dream-case 
No. 464.) 

In the next stage of visualisation the percipient sees a face or 
figure projected or depicted, as it were, on some convenient surface 
the image being thus truly externalised, but in an unreal and unsub- 
stantial fashion, and in a bizarre relation to the real objects among 
which it appears. In this respect it might be compared to the 
" after-image " of the sun, or of some object that has been intently 
scrutinised through a microscope, which we involuntarily import into 
our views of the surrounding scene. The following example is taken 
from the Memoirs of Georgiana, Lady Chatterton, by E. H. Dering 
(1878), pp. 100-102. It exemplifies again the peculiarity observed 
in the last case the blood being a feature in the vision which we may 
confidently refer to the agent's mind. Lady Chatterton narrates : 

(221) "My mother [the wife of the Rev. Tremonger Lascelles, Prebendary 
of Winchester,] had not been very well, but there was nothing alarming 
in her state. I was suffering from a bad cold, and went early to bed 
one night, after leaving her in the drawing-room in excellent spirits, and 
tolerably well. I slept unusually well, and when I awoke, the moon was 
shining through the old casement brightly into the room. The white 
curtains of my bed were drawn to protect me from the draught that 
came through the large window ; and on this curtain, as if depicted there, 
I saw the figure of my mother, the face deadly pale, with blood x flowing 
on the bed-clothes. For a moment I lay horror-stricken and unable to 
move or cry out, till, thinking it might be a dream or a delusion, I raised 
myself up in bed, and touched the curtain. Still the appearance re- 
mained (although the curtain on which it was depicted moved to and fro 
when I touched it) as if reflected by a magic-lantern. In great terror I 
got up, and throwing on a cloak, I rushed off through some rooms and a 
long passage to my mother's room. To my surprise, I saw from the 
further end of the passage that her door was open, and a strong light 
coming from it across the passage. As she invariably locked her door 
when she went to bed, my fears were increased by the sight, and I ran on 
more quickly still, and entered her room. There she lay, just as I had 
seen her on the curtain, pale as death, and the sheet covered with blood, 
and two doctors standing by the bedside. She saw me at once and 
seemed delighted to see me, though too weak to speak or hold out her 
hand. ' She has been very ill,' said the doctor, ' but she would not allow 
you to be called, lest your cold should be made worse. But I trust all 
danger is over now. . . . The sight of you has decidedly done her 

Gabbage, cited by M. Ribot, Maladies de la Personnalitt, p. Ill ; with which compare 
case 301 below. For further telepathic examples, see cases 161, 240, 350 (in "Additions 
and Corrections "), 553, 572. 

1 Compare the dream-cases Nos. 432, 463 466, 467. 


much good.' So she had been in danger, and would not disturb me ! Oh ! 
how thankful I felt to the vision or fancy, or whatever it may have been." 

Mrs. Ferrers, of Baddesley Clinton, Knowle, a niece of Lady 
Chatterton's, wrote to us on October 24th, 1883, "This account is taken 
from a diary of my aunt's." She adds later : 

" I have often and often heard my aunt relate that vision, but it was 
not, so far as I know, recorded in any contemporary diary. 

" Lady C. related the story to Lockhart and his daughter about 1843, 
and then wrote it down in her diary. The entry is not dated ; the date 
before it is May, 1843, that which follows, 1842, but it was evidently 
written down between 1839 and 1848. The book is very badly arranged 
as to chronology. I can't fix the date of Lady C.'s mother's death from 
it except that it was prior to 1836. " R. H. FERRERS." 

Here the picture, though not producing the impression of a solid 
and independent object, was clearly no mere illusion, no mere 
momentary translation of the folds or pattern of the drapery into a 
human face ; it was accurate and persistent enough to resist a touch 
which shook the curtain on which it was shown. It is a point of 
interest that (besides a second veridical case given in Chap. XII. 7,) 
Lady Chatterton mentions having experienced another hallucination 
which, like the one just quoted, appeared on a flat surfaced On 
the theory of telepathic phantasms explained in Chap. XII., 5, it is 
of course quite natural that a veridical and a non-veridical vision, 
or that several veridical visions, occurring to the same person, should 
present this amount of likeness, as, e.g., in Mr. Gottschalk's experience. 
But the point is one that we can rarely observe, as few of our telepathic 
percipients have had any second hallucination of the senses at all. 

But yet further stages remain, on the path to the final one of natural 
solid-looking externality. In the following case the image appeared 
with somewhat more of apparent relief than in Lady Chatterton's, 
but certainly not yet as co-ordinate in any natural fashion with the 
real objects in view. The account is from Mr. Richard Searle, 
barrister, of Home Lodge, Herne Hill, who tells us that he has had 

no other experience of a hallucination. 

" November 2nd, 1883. 

(222) "One afternoon, a few years ago, I was sitting in my chambers in 
the Temple, working at some papers. My desk is between the fireplace and 
one of the windows, the window being two or three yards on the left side 
of my chair, and looking out into the Temple. Suddenly I became aware 
that I was looking at the bottom window-pane, which was about on a level 

1 She records apparently in her journal that, when sleeping as a child in a 
"haunted room," she woke in the middle of the night, and saw a brilliant light on the 
wall, and figures of men passing over it, as in a panorama, fighting. She inferred from 
the words and gestures of her nurse, who was apparently sitting up in her sleep with 
fixed and open eyes, that she saw the same scene ; and the nurse may possibly have been 
the "agent" of the child's impression (see Chap, xviii. 5). 

VOL. II. D 2 


with my eyes, and there I saw the figure of the head and face of my wife, 
in a reclining position, with the eyes closed and the face quite white and 
bloodless, as if she were dead. 

" I pulled myself together, and got up and looked out of the window, 
where I saw nothing but the houses opposite, and I came to the conclusion 
that I had been drowsy and had fallen asleep, and, after taking a few 
turns about the room to rouse myself, I sat down again to my work and 
thought no more of the matter. 

" I went home at my usual time that evening, and whilst my wife and 
I were at dinner, she told me that she had lunched with a friend who lived 
in Gloucester Gardens, and that she had taken with her a little child, one 
of her nieces, who was staying with us ; but during lunch, or just after it, 
the child had a fall and slightly cut her face so that the blood came. After 
telling the story, my wife added that she was so alarmed when she saw the 
blood on the child's face that she had fainted. What I had seen in the 
window then occurred to my mind, and I asked her what time it was 
when this happened. She said, as far as she remembered, it must have 
been a few minutes after 2 o'clock. This was the time, as nearly as I could 
calculate, not having looked at my watch, when I saw the figure in the 

" I have only to add that this is the only occasion on which I have 
known my wife to have had a fainting-fit. She was in bad health at the 
time, and I did not mention to her what I had seen until a few days after- 
wards, when she had become stronger. I mentioned the occurrence to 
several of my friends at the time. ({ -p> q 

Mr. Paul Pierrard, of 27, Gloucester Gardens, W., writes as follows : 

" 4th December, 1883. 

" It may be interesting for special observers to have a record of an 
extraordinary occurrence which happened about four years ago at my resi- 
dence, 27j Gloucester Gardens, W. 

" At an afternoon party of ladies and children, among whom were Mrs. 
Searle, of Home Lodge, Herne Hill, and her little niece, Louise, there 
was a rather noisy, bustling, and amusing game round a table, when little 
Louise fell from her chair and hurt herself slightly. The fear of a grave 
accident caused Mrs. Searle to be very excited, and she fainted. 

" The day after, we met Mr. Searle, who stated that in the afternoon of 
the preceding day he had been reading important cases in his chambers, 
No. 6, Pump Court, Temple, when a peculiar feeling overcame him, and 
he distinctly saw, as it were in a looking-glass, the very image of his 
wife leaning back in a swoon, which seemed very strange at the moment. 

" By comparing the time, it was found that this extraordinary vision 
was produced at the very same instant as the related incident. 

" We often spoke of the case together, and could not find any explana- 
tion to completely satisfy our minds ; but we registered this rare fact for 
which a name is wanted. p AUL PIERKARD.' 

Here there was more than the mere representation of the agent; 
she was represented apparently in the aspect which she actually 
wore, but in which the percipient had never seen her, and in which 


she would hardly be consciously picturing herself. We are scarcely 
driven, however, in this case, to the difficult conception of" telepathic 
clairvoyance " set forth in Chapter XII., 8 ; for it is possible to 
suppose that the idea of fainting, impressed on Mr. Searle's mind, 
worked itself out into perception in an appropriate fashion. 

The stage of visualisation in the next case is particularly inter- 
esting. The narrator is Mrs. Taunton, of Brook Vale, Witton, 

"January 15th, 1884. 

(223) " On Thursday evening, 14th November, 1867, I was sitting in 
the Birmingham Town Hall with my husband at a concert, when 
there came over me the icy chill which usually accompanies these 
occurrences. 1 Almost immediately, I saw with perfect distinctness, 
between myself and the orchestra, my uncle, Mr. W., lying in bed 
with an appealing look on his face, like one dying. I had not heard 
anything of him for several months, and had no reason to think he was 
ill. The appearance was not transparent or filmy, but perfectly solid- 
looking ; and yet I could somehow see the orchestra, not through, but 
behind it. I did not try turning my eyes to see whether the figure 
moved with them, but looked at it with a fascinated expression that 
made my husband ask if I was ill. I asked him not to speak to me for a 
minute or two ; the vision gradually disappeared, and I told my husband, 
after the concert was over, what I had seen. A letter came shortly after 
telling of my uncle's death. He died at exactly the time when I saw the 
vision. " E. F. TAUNTON." 

The signature of Mrs. Taunton's husband is also appended. 


We find from an obituary notice in the Belfast News-Letter that Mr. W. 
died on November 14th, 1867. 

The phantasm here was perfectly external, and is described as 
" perfectly solid-looking " ; yet it certainly did not hold to the real 
objects around the same relation as a figure of flesh and blood would 
have held ; it was in a peculiar way transparent. This feature is 
noticeable, as it is one which occasionally occurs also in hallu- 
cinations of the purely subjective class. 2 It may thus be taken as one 
of the numerous minor indications of the hallucinatory character of 
telepathic phantasms (see Chapter XII., 10). 

1 This refers to a few other experiences of a different character, one of which, how- 
ever, involved a hallucination of sight. The cold sensation described was a feature in 
cases 28 and 149 ; and appears again in case 286, where the percipient describes a sensa- 
tion as of " cold water poured on the nape of the neck"; in case 302, where what is 
described is a sense of physical chill, without any flutter of the nerves ; and in cases 313 
and 352. Compare also cases 211 and 263, where however, (as perhaps in some of the 
other instances) the feelings may not have been due to anything more specific than 
m om entary shock or alarm. 

2 Of many subjective hallucinations, it has been specially noticed that they hid what- 


2. In the remaining cases the illusion seems to have been practi- 
cally complete. They constitute what may be called the normal type 
of these abnormal phenomena. The hallucination goes through no 
gradual process of formation, and is externalised as fully and 
naturally as a real object ; the agent contributes to it little, if any, of 
the actual detail of his condition ; the percipient contributes to it 
no special imagery or setting of his own. 

The following narrative is from M. Gaston Fournier, of 21, Rue de 
Berlin, Paris, an intimate friend of our esteemed collaborator, M. Ch. 
Richet. He has antedated the occurrence by about 18 months. 

" 16, Octobre, 1885. 

(224) " Le 21 feVrier, 1879,j'etaisinvit(3 a diner chez mes amis, M. et 

Mme. B . En arrivant dans le salon, je constate 1'absence d'un 

commensal ordinaire de la maison, M. d'E , que je recontrais presque 

toujours a leur table. J'en fais la remarque, et Mme. B me repond 

que d'E , employ^ dans une importance maison de banque, etait sans 

doute fort occup^ en ce moment, car on ne 1'avait pas vu depuis deux 

jours. A partir de ce moment, il nefut plus plus question de d'E . Le 

repas s'acheve fort gaiement, et sans que Mme. B donne la moindre 

marque visible de preoccupation. Pendant le diner, nous avions forme' le 
projet d'aller achever notre soire'e au theatre. Au dessert Mme. B 
se leve pour aller s'habiller dans sa chambre, dont la porte, reste"e 

entr'ouverte, donne dans la salle-a-manger. B et moi e"tions restee a 

table, fumant notre cigare, quand, apres quelques minutes a peine, nous 
entendons un cri terrible. Croyant a un accident, nous nous pre'cipitons 

dans la chambre, et nous trouvons Mme. B assise, prete a se trouver 

mal. Nous nous empressons autour d'elle ; elle se remet peu a peu, et 
nous fait alors le recit suivant. 

" 'Apres vous avoir quitted, je m' habillais pour sortir, etj'etais en train 

ever was behind the place which they appeared to occupy ; and the rule seems to be 
that when the percept is completely externalised, it is solid-looking. But exceptions are 
not infrequent. Whitish transparent figures were a feature in a pathological case first 
published in the Phrenological Journal and Miscellany (Edinburgh), No vi., p. 290, &c., 
and described in the well-known article on " Spectral Illusions " in Chambers' Miscellany. 
Wundt (Op. cit., Vol. ii., p. 357,) records the experience of au overseer of forests, who 
saw heaps of wood all round him in his house, but also saw the furniture and carpet 
just as usual. (Of. case 193.) Miss Morse, of Vermont, a careful observer, who has had 
hallucinations at rare intervals during a good many years, tells me, that at first " they 
seemed to be pictured just within instead of before my eyes." Lately, however, "they 
have usually been projected into space ; but however real the apparitions at first 
appear, a close inspection reveals that they have no solidity that objects can be 
seen through them. Another of my informants, who on waking had a hallucination 
of a tall female figure, noticed that he could see a towel through her ; and similarly in 
one of my cases of persistent dream-images, Professor Goodwin reports that with him 
they ' ' retain an appearance of solidity for some seconds after waking, the furniture of the 
room being distinctly recognised through these figures, like a dissolving view. " Another 
correspondent describes such images as seen " as it were with one eye asleep, the other 
awake." In one of Paterson's cases (Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal for Jan., 
1843), the phantasm appeared as though seen through gauze. I may also refer to the 
telepathic phantasms which gave the impression of being formed from mist (Chap xii., 
3, cases 315, 518, and Mrs. Deane's experience, p. 237). I have mentioned that 
the disappearance is occasionally through a stage of increased tenuity and trans- 


de nouer les brides demon chapeau devant ma glace, quand tout-a-coupj'ai 

vu dans cette glace d'E entrer par la porte. 1 II avait son chapeau sur 

la tete ; il e"tait pile et triste ; sans me retourner je lui adresse la parole, 

" Tiens, d'E , vous voilk ; asseyez-vous done "; et comine il ne re'pondait 

pas, je me suis alors retourn^ et je n'ai plus rien vu ; prise alors de peur, 
j'ai pousse" le cri que vous avez entendu.' 

" B , pour rassurer sa femme, se met a la plaisanter, traitant 

1'apparition d'hallucination nerveuse, et lui disant que d'E serait tres 

flatt^ d'apprendre k quel point il occupait sa pense'e ; puis, comine Mme. 

B restait toute tremblante, pour couper court k son Emotion, nous lui 

proposons de partir tout de suite, alle"guant que nous allions manquer le 

lever du rideau. ' Je n'ai pas pens^ un seul instant a d'E ,' nous dit 

Mme. B , ' depuis que M. F m'a demand^ la cause de son absence. 

Je ne suis pas nerveuse, et je n'ai jamais eu d'hallucination ; je vous 
assure qu'il y la quelque chose d'extraordinaire, et quant a moi, je ne 

sortirai pas avant d'avoir des nouvelles de d' E . Je vous supplie 

d'aller chez lui, c'est le seul moyen de me rassurer.' Je conseille a B 

de ce'der au de'sir de sa femme, et nous partons tous les deux chez d'E , 

qui demeurait a tres peu de distance. Tout en marchant nous plaisantions 
beaucoup sur les frayeurs de Mme. B- 

En arrivant chez d' E , nous demandons au concierge, ' D' E- 

est-il chez lui' 1 l Oui, messieurs, il n'est pas descendu de la journe'e.' 

D' E habitait un petit appartement de gargon ; il n'avait pas de 

domestiques. Nous montons chez lui, et nous sonnons a plusieurs reprises 
sans avoir de re'ponse. Nous sonnons plus fort, puis nous frappons & tour 

de bras, sans plus de succes. B , emotionn^ malgrd lui, me dit, ' C'est 

absurde, le concierge se sera tromp^ ; il est sorti ; descendons.' Mais le 

concierge nous affirme que d'E n'est pas sorti, qu'il en est absolument 

sur. VeYitablement effraye's, nous remontons avec lui, et nous tentons 
de nouveau de nous faire ouvrir ; puis n' entendant rien bouger dans 
Fappartement, nous envoyons chercher un serrurier. On force la porte, et 

nous trouvons le corps de d'E , encore chaud, couche" sur son lit, et 

trou^ de deux coups de revolver. 

" Le me'decin, que nous faisons venir aussitot, constate que d'E 
avait d'abord tent^ de se suicider en avalant un flacon de laudanum, et 
qu' ensuite, trouvant sans doute que le poison n' agissait pas assez vite, il 
s'e'tait tire 7 deux coups de revolver a la place du creur. D'apres la con- 
station me'dicale, la mort remontait a une heure environ. Sans que 
je puisse pre"ciser 1'heure exacte, c'e'tait cependant une coincidence 

presqu' absolue avec la soi-disant hallucination de Mme. B . Sur la 

chemine'e il y avait une lettre de d'E , annongant a M. et Mme. B 

sa resolution, lettre particulierement affectueuse pour Mme. B 


In conversation with Mr. Myers, M. Fournier expressed himself un- 
certain as to the correctness of his date. We have procured a copy of 

the Act de De"ces, which records that the date of d'E 's death was 

October 7, 1880 ; also that it took place at 10 a.m. If this was so, it 

1 The vision in the glass is, of course, itself the hallucination in this case (cf. Vol. i., 
p. 444, note), and does not imply either actual reflection, or even a corresponding phantasm 
to be seen in the room, had Mme. B. turned her head. That such a phantasm might have 
appeared is, however, shown by the case in Vol. i., p. 469, note. 


would still be quite possible that the body, which was clothed, should be 
found warm in the evening. Probably the hour could not be stated with 
anything like precision ; and it is as likely that the official record fixed it 
too early as that M. Fournier's medical authority (supposing him to be 
correctly quoted) fixed it too late. But we clearly cannot assume the 
coincidence to have been nearly as exact as M. Fournier imagined. 

Mme. B. is dead. M. B. is unfortunately in South America ; and 
though we hope to obtain his account of the occurrence, it has not arrived 
in time for insertion. 

Mrs. Leonard Thrupp, of 67, Kensington Gardens Square, W., 

narrates: "November, 1883. 

(225) " In the month of October, 1850, I was staying in the house of 
Mr. D., an East Indian merchant, No. 1, South wick Crescent, Hyde Park. 

" One evening, a Mr. B., with three daughters, came to dine the 
youngest a blooming rosy girl of 17. Mr. B. had lately bought a house 
in Devonshire, which was being added to and furnished. He made our 
host promise to go down to the house-warming at Christmas. 

" A few weeks afterwards, that gentleman was out one night, and his 
sister, Mrs. R., and I sat by the fire in a large double drawing-room. She 
was knitting, and from her position could see into the smaller room which 
was not lighted. I had my back to that room, and was reading aloud one 
of Charles Dickens' serial stories. All of a sudden she dropped her work, 
exclaiming faintly, ' Good God ! ' ' What is the matter ? ' I cried. She 
pointed into the semi-darkness, and whispered (as if awe-struck), ' There's 
Louisa B.' I rose, looked, but saw nothing. She said, ' Are you afraid to 
go in ? ' ' Not at all,' I replied, and went, and passed my arm round to 
prove it was mere fancy on her part. However, the result showed that 
was youthful presumption on my part. 

" The next morning, Mr. D. heard the story from his sister in her own 
apartment, where she breakfasted. He said to me in the breakfast-room, 
' Did not you see anything last night, Miss Hill ? ' ' Nothing whatever,' I 
replied. ' Well,' said he, ' I suppose you think us Scotch very superstitious, 
but an aunt of ours and two of my sisters have the gift of second-sight.' 

" That day passed, but the following day at noon, Mr. D. met me at 
the bottom of the stairs with an open letter and said, ' That was no fancy 
of Mrs. R.'s ; poor Louisa B. died at 9 o'clock that evening, of brain fever, 
after measles.' " ANNE ELIZABETH THRUPP." 

Since giving this account, Mrs. Thrupp has referred to old letters, and 
has come to the opinion that the date must have been towards the end of 
1847. We find, however, from the obituary in the Gentleman 's Magazine 
that a death, which is almost certainly that of the Miss Louisa B. of the 
narrative, took place on July 8, 1847. This suggests that the detail of 
sitting by the fire is inaccurate the temperature at 9 p.m. on that 
day, as we learn from the Greenwich Observatory, having been 60 ; 
but Mrs. Thrupp is quite certain that her memory is right on 
this point. She further tells us that there were reasons why Miss 
B. should have wished to see Mr. D., who was an old friend of the 
family, but that she knew little of Mrs. R. Mrs R. has been dead 
some years ; and Mrs. Durward, a lady who was her companion at the 


time, and who as Mrs. Thrupp recollects assisted Mrs. R. to bed, 
remembers no more of the matter than that Mrs. R. was excited. She 
mentions, however, that Mrs. R. was " subject to a kind of seizure," in 
which she would become quite rigid, and point with her finger to where 
she imagined her husband to be, exclaiming, " There he is." These fits 
occurred perhaps half a dozen times in a year, and were brought on by 
any news of him that distressed her. Mrs. Durward never knew her to 
have apparitions of anyone except her husband. 

This case is an example of an appearance to a person only 
slightly connected with the agent ; and it cannot but suggest the 
question, would Mr. D. have seen the figure had he been present ? 
I shall recur to the point in connection with "collective " hallucinations 
(Chap. XVIII., 7). As to Mrs. E.'s pathological visions, I may point 
out that the extent to which they weaken the evidence for telepathy 
afforded by the present incident may easily be exaggerated. People 
seem sometimes to regard any real or supposed tendency to subjective 
hallucination on the part of the percipient as at once fatal to an 
alleged telepathic case. Now let us grant for the moment that Mrs. 
R's visions of her husband prove a tendency to similar subjective 
visions of other persons known to her ; and let us make the extreme 
supposition that, unknown to her intimate attendant who never knew 
her to have any such experience, she actually had 50 in the course 
of her adult life or on an average one in every 292 days, if we 
reckon her adult life as 40 years. Then the probability of her having 
a vision of the sort on the particular day on which Miss B. died would 
be ^. But the probability that that particular vision would repre- 
sent Miss B., with whom she had only a slight acquaintance, would 
clearly be very small ; let us be liberal, and call it s"&. Thus the 
probability of her hitting off the above coincidence by accident would 
be at most rrW, even if we took only the identity of day into 
account; and very much less if we relied on the alleged identity 
of hour. It would surely be irrational to exclude from the cumu- 
lative- telepathic evidence a case where the probability of accidental 
occurrence remains as minute as this. 

The next case is from General H., who, unfortunately, will not 
permit the publication of his name. The account was procured 
through the kindness of Miss A. A. Leith, of 8, Dorset Square, N.W. 

"November llth, 1884. 

(226) "In 1856 I was engaged on duty at a place called Roha, some 40 
miles south of Bombay, and moving about in the districts (as it is 
termed in India). My only shelter was a tent, in which I lived for 
several months in the year. My parents, and only sister, about 22 years 


of age, were living at K., from which place letters used to take a week 
reaching me. My sister and I were regular correspondents, and the post 
generally arrived about 6 a.m., as I was starting to my work. It was on 
the 18th April of that year (a day never to be forgotten) that I received 
a letter from my mother, stating that my sister was not feeling well, but 
hoped to write to me the next day. There was nothing in the letter to 
make me feel particularly anxious. After my usual out-door work, I 
returned to my tent, and in due course set to my ordinary daily work. 
At 2 o'clock my clerk was with me, reading some native documents that 
required my attention, and I was in no way thinking of my sister, when 
all of a sudden I was startled by seeing my sister (as it appeared) walk 
in front of me from one door of the tent to the other, dressed in her night- 
dress. 1 The apparition had such an effect upon me that I felt persuaded 
that my sister had died at that time. I wrote at once to my father, 
stating what I had seen, and in due time I also heard from him that 
my sister had died at that time. j Q jj 

An obituary notice in Allen's Indian Mail shows that General H.'s 
sister died on April 18th, 1856. 

In answer to inquiries, General H. writes : 

" By the context of the narrative you will see it was 2 p.m., broad 
daylight. My vision corresponded with the exact time of death. 

" I have never seen any other apparition. 

" You must excuse my sanctioning my name being appended to the 
account, though I am as certain of it as I am of my own existence." 

[General H. further informs us that his parents are dead, and that 
there is no friend living who may have seen his letter.] 

The next case a recent one is of a very unusual type as 
regards the effect on the percipient, and, perhaps, on that very 
account suggests the telepathic explanation rather more strongly 
than the facts warrant. But as regards the facts themselves, there 
can be little doubt. The evidence, though it does not come from the 
percipient, is of the sort which is as good as first-hand ; and this is 
the more fortunate, in that, as it happens, there never was a moment 
at which the first-hand evidence could have been given. The account 
is in the words of Mr. H. King, of the Royal Military College, York 

Town, Farnborough, Hants. 

"March, 1885. 

(227) " On Thursday night, October 30th [1884], H. M. and I went to 
dine at Broadmoor. We stayed till 10 p.m. or so, and on leaving the house 
were talking of different things, M. being quite as usual ; when, after 
five minutes' walk, M suddenly stopped, and said, ' Look, look ! oh, 
look ! ' We thought nothing of it at first, but he still kept pointing 
with his finger at some imaginary thing in the darkness. The spot we 
were in was very dark, with a wood on our right and a field on our left, 

1 For this feature, compare the dream-case, No. 118. 


separated from us by a railing. Thinking M. saw somebody hiding 
behind a bush I went forward, but saw nothing. M. now, still saying 
' Look at her, look at her,' fell back against the railing and lay motion- 
less with his back against it. We ran to him, asking him what was the 
matter, but he. only moaned. After a while he seemed better. We 
wanted him to come on, but he said, ' Where is my stick 1 ' which he had 
dropped. ' Oh, never mind your stick,' I said, for I was afraid of not 
being at the college before the shutting of the doors ; but he would look 
for his stick, which he found by lighting a match. We walked on 
together, M., notwithstanding all my efforts to get him into conversation, 
not saying a word. After walking for about a quarter of a mile, he 
suddenly said, ' Where were they carrying her to ? I tell you they were 
carrying her ; didn't you see them carrying her ? ' I tried to quiet him, 
but he kept on saying, ' I tell you they were carrying her.' In a short 
time he was pacified and walked quietly on for half a mile or so, when he 
said, looking round in surprise, ' Hullo ! we must have come a short cut. 
I know this house.' I said we hadn't ; but he said, ' We must have run 
then. It seems only a minute ago since we left the house.' He several 
times expressed his surprise at the quickness we had done the last half- 
mile in. He was all right from this to the college. 

" On Sunday morning he told me that something very bad happened on 
Thursday night. An old lady who was very fond of him, but whom he hadn't 
seen for a long time, had died suddenly of heart disease. She had been out 
somewhere and had come home, when, as she was receiving some friends, she 
fell dead, and, to use his words, she was carried out. I immediately asked 
him at what hour did she die ? He said at between 10 and 11. (It was 
a little after 10 when he saw his vision.) I could not get the exact hour 
of the lady's death, as he didn't like the subject. When he told me this, 
he knew nothing of what occurred on the walk home. When he was 
told of it, he didn't remember a thing about the vision ; but said if he 
hadn't known that he hadn't drunk anything (which was true), he would 
have said he had been drunk. He seemed to have been in a sort of stupor 
all the time. I think I ought to mention that he told me long before 
this that he had seen a vision of a girl who had been drowned. 1 This is 
a true account of what happened. 

(Signed) " H. KING (the writer of the above). 

Mr. H. King adds, " My friend [Mr. Jones] remembers perfectly 
M.'s not being surprised at the news [of the death], and his saying it 
seemed to have happened before." 

[Mr. R. A. King, of 36, Grove Lane, Denmark Hill, uncle of the 
narrator, through whose kindness we obtained this account, says : " M. 
has such a horror of the whole affair that my nephew does not let me 
write to ask him about the old lady's death." We are thus unable to 
verify the date of the death independently. M.'s name is known to me. 
He has left the Military College.] 

The next case is from the Rev. F. Barker, late Rector of Cottenham, 

1 This other vision followed closely on an accident which had much distressed the 


"July 2nd, 1884. 

(228) " At about 11 o'clock on the night of December 6th, 1873, 1 had 
just got into bed, and had certainly not fallen asleep, or even into a doze, 
when I suddenly startled my wife by a deep groan, and when she asked the 
reason, I said, ' I have just seen my aunt. She came and stood beside me, 
and smiled with her old kind smile, and disappeared.' A much-loved aunt, 
my mother's sister, was at that time in Madeira, for her health, ac- 
companied by my cousin, her niece. I had no reason to think that she was 
critically ill at this time, but the impression made upon me was so great 
that the next day I told her family (my mother among them) what I had 
seen. Within a week afterwards we heard that she had died on that very 
night, and, making all allowance for longitude, at about that very time. 

" When my cousin, who was with her to the last, heard what I had 
seen, she said, ' I am not at all surprised, for she was calling out for you 
all the time she was dying.' 

" This is the only time I have experienced anything of this nature. I 
think, perhaps, this story first-hand may interest you. I can only say that 
the vivid impression I received that night has never left me. 


We find the date of death confirmed in the Times obituary. 
Mrs. Barker's account is as follows : 

" I recollect the circumstances well, upon which my husband wrote to 
you. It must have been somewhere about 11 o'clock. He was not 
asleep (for he had only just spoken), when he groaned deeply. I asked 
what was the matter, and he said his" aunt, who was then in Madeira, had 
appeared to him, smiling at him with her own kind smile, and then 
vanished. He said she had ' something black, it might have been lace, 
thrown over her head.' The next day he told many relations of the 
occurrence, and it turned out she died that very night. Her niece, Miss 
Garnett, told me she was not at all astonished that he should have seen 
her aunt, for that while she was dying she was calling out for him. He 
had been to her almost like a son. 

"P. S. BARKER." 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Barker says, " My recollection is of some 
lace-like head-gear, as of a black lace veil thrown round the head." 

The following statement is from Miss Garnett, who was with Mr. 
Barker's aunt at the time of her death : 

" Wyreside, near Lancaster. 

"October, 1885. 

" I beg to certify that I was with my aunt, Miss , at the time 

of her death in Madeira, December 6th, 1873. On hearing that my cousin, 
the Rev. F. Barker, now living in Stanley Place, Chester, had had some 
kind of a vision of my aunt at a time almost exactly corresponding with 
that of her death, I told my uncle, from whom I heard of the occurrence, 
that I was not surprised, since my aunt had so frequently expressed a 
wish to see Mr. Barker during the last few days of her life 



The following case was first published in Bui^ma, Past and 
Present, by Lieut.-Gen. Albert Fytche, C.S.I, Vol. I, pp. 177-8. 

(229) "A remarkable incident occurred to me at Maulmain, which made 
a deep impression upon my imagination. I saw a ghost 1 with my own eyes 
in broad daylight, of which I could make an affidavit. I had an old 
schoolfellow, who was afterwards a college friend, with whom I had lived 
in the closest intimacy. Years, however, passed without our seeing each 
other. One morning I had just got out of bed, and was dressing myself, 
when suddenly my old friend entered the room. I greeted him warmly ; 
told him to call for a cup of tea in the verandah, and promised to be witli 
him immediately. I dressed myself in all haste, and went out into the 
verandah, but found no one there. I could not believe my eyes. I called 
to the sentry who was posted at the front of the house, but he had seen no 
strange gentleman that morning ; the servants also declared that no such 
person had entered the house. I was certain I had seen my friend. I was 
not thinking about him at the time, yet I was not taken by surprise, as 
steamers and other vessels were frequently arriving at Maulmain. A fort- 
night afterwards news arrived that he had died 600 miles off, about the 
very time I had seen him at Maulmain." 

General Fytche writes to Professor Sidgwick as follows : 

" Durling Dean, West Cliff, Bournemouth," 
" December 22nd, 1883." 

" A paper containing answers to your list of questions is enclosed. I 
don't think I have anything further to add, except to reiterate my convic- 
tion that my friend's et<?w>ov did appear to me as stated. My friend's 
death was a sudden one ; I had never heard of his previous illness, nor 
had I been thinking about him in any way. In animistic philosophy, 
savage or civilised, I believe it is admitted that an apparition of the kind 
bears the likeness of its fleshly body. 

" Answers to questions as to the apparition at Maulmain : 

(1) "The printed narrative was written from memory. I kept no 
diary after my papers were burnt at Bassein (see p. 24 of book). There 
are no letters extant which I am aware of which were written at the time 
of the occurrence. 

(2) " The news of my friend's death was conveyed by the public news- 
papers, which arrived at Maulmain by the mail steamer about a fortnight 
after the incident in question. They stated that the death of my friend 
occurred in the early morning of the day his spirit appeared to me. 

(3) " When the apparition was addressed by me, it did not respond by 
word or sign, at least so far as I observed. I was not thinking of an 
apparition. I took it for my friend in the flesh. 

(4) "The event occurred some 26 years ago, and the persons who 
resided near me at the time, and whom I visited on the morning of the 
occurrence, are dead. The year following I visited England, and mentioned 
the circumstance to several members of my family, and amongst others, I. 
think, my cousin, Louis Tennyson d'Eyncourt, one of the London 
magistrates, but it was not a matter that I ever talked much about. 

(5) " I have had no similar experience. I have had no hallucination of 

1 See p. 48, note. 


sight or hearing, and have always been considered as a person of the 
strongest nerve. " A. FYTCHE (General)." 

Mr. d'Eyncourt writes from 31, Cornwall Gardens, S.W., on Dec. 21, 
1885 : 

" General Fytche paid me a visit at Hadley a year or two 1 before he 
published his book I should say from 15 to 18 years since, and told me 
the story as narrated afterwards in his book ; and it made a great 
impression on me and my family. I cannot remember what year he told 
me, but certainly not 25 years since ; perhaps 20 would be nearer the 

[General Fytche is under a promise not to disclose his friend's name ; 
which prevents us from ascertaining the exact date of the incident.] 

The next case is from Mr. Evans, of Byron Cottage, Chalford, 

near Stroud. 

"April 17th, 1884. 

(230) "In the fall of 1867, I took a trip to Canada; and one evening, 
the early part of October, the same year, I was sitting with a merchant of 
Toronto, in the dress-circle of the theatre ; and during the evening my 
attention was attracted towards a portion of the pit, which was, through 
shadow, slightly obscured, by a face looking up at me in an intent, weird, 
and agonising manner, that caused a feeling of awe to overpower me, as I 
recognised in the features my twin brother, 2 who at that time was in 
China. The figure, although in shadow, appeared lighted up super- 
naturally, and revealed itself plainly, so that I could not be mistaken about 
the face. I instantly exclaimed to my friend, ' Good God ! there is my 
brother,' pointing at the same time to the figure. He said, ' I cannot see 
anyone looking up here.' However, I was so excited I rushed down to 
the pit where he stood, but could not see anyone resembling him in 
features whatever. I am not superstitious or a Spiritualist, but could not 
get over the startling circumstances for some time. 

" On my return home to England, shortly afterwards, much to my 
grief and sorrow, I found my brother had died at the French Hospital, 
Shanghai, on the 6th October, 1867. The incident in the theatre flashed 
into my thoughts, and impressed me I had seen his apparition, and I took 
the trouble to ascertain date of performance, and found it corresponded. 
I could not be mistaken, as it occurred the first week I was in Toronto, 
and the patronage of the military placed the performance precisely on the 
6th October, 1867. 

" I am prepared to make an affidavit that such are the facts. 

"J. EVANS." 

We find from a certified copy of the Register of Deaths kept at the 
British Consulate, at Shanghai, that the death took place on October 6th, 
1868 (not 1867), at the General Hospital. 

I wrote to Mr. Evans, explaining that it would be the evening, 
(10.37 p.m.) not of October 6th, but of October 5th, at Toronto, that would 
correspond with October 6th, midday, at Shanghai. As I anticipated, it 

1 The interval must have been longer than this, as the book was published in 1878. 

2 Other cases where the agent was a twin brother are Nos. 76, 77, 78, and 134. 


turned out that he had assumed that October 6th in one place would be 
October 6th in another, and had simply asked which opera was performed 
on October 6th. He says : 

" I wrote to my friend in Toronto, asking him if the ' Grand Duchess ' 
were performed on October 6th, and he replied in the affirmative ; but at 
the same time it was performed on the 5th, I am sure, as well as on the 
6th. The company was performing opera bouffe during the entire week. 

" I have never had any hallucinations before or since." 

We have procured from Toronto a copy of the Daily Globe, which 
shows that the " Grand Duchess " was performed on both nights. 

[Mr. Evans has had no recent communication with his companion of 
the evening, who was only an acquaintance ; and corroboration cannot be 
obtained. The uncertainty as to the day of the apparition seems irre- 
movable. If it was the 5th, the coincidence may have been quite exact ; 
if it was the 6th, the 1 2 hours' limit must have been exceeded, unless the 
death took place in the hour or two preceding midnight.] 

Here we have to notice once more the luminous appearance of 
the phantasm (Chap. XII., 7). 

The following narrative appeared in the Daily Telegraph, in 
October, 1881. Unfortunately we have been unable to obtain corro- 
boration or further details, as we have failed to discover the writer's 
present address. We learn from the War Office that he resigned 
his militia commission in August, 1880. 

" West Brompton. 

" October 25th, 1881. 

(231) " SIR, Of many comrades who gave up their lives for Queen and 
country in Zululand and Natal, for none have I, or those who knew him, 
felt a keener pang of regret than for Rudolph Gough. In November, 1878, 
Gough, having retired from the Coldstream Guards, proceeded as a 
volunteer to Natal, where on arrival he was given a company in Com- 
mandant Nettleton's battalion of the Natal Native Contingent, with which 
regiment he served in the first advance into Zululand. The Etshowe 
relief column commenced its advance on March 29th, and reached the 
Inyone River on the evening of that day. To all our astonishment, Gough, 
who had risen from a sick bed in Durban, accompanied by Lieutenant 
George Davis of his own regiment, arrived in camp at dusk, having ridden 
through from Durban, a distance of 82 miles, in little over a day. Gough, 
who had suffered badly en route, was again severely attacked by that 
curse of South African Armies dysentery and was ordered to one of the 
ambulances, where he remained until the morning of the action of Gingih- 
lovo. The moment the alarm sounded, the poor fellow staggered out and 
took command of his company, and afterwards actually led his men over 
the shelter trench, when the cheer was started and the charge sounded.' 
The excitement and exertion proved too much for my poor friend's 
enfeebled frame, and utter collapse followed. 

" On April 17th, just before ' tattoo,' I was sitting in the gipsy-looking 
edifice that the officers of the King's Royal Rifle Corps had rigged up, 


which we dubbed the ' mess house ' or ' banqueting hall,' finishing a 
letter to a newspaper for which I acted as correspondent, when the 
brigade bugler rang out ' last post.' I walked to the door, outside of which 
I saw standing the man who, two days ago, I had been told was dying on 
the other side of the Tugela. I could not describe on paper the extra- 
ordinary sensation that Gough's unexpected appearance gave me. 

" Some few days after I returned to Fort Pearson to re-assume com- 
mand of the Natal Native Pioneers. After reporting my arrival, I made 
my way to the post-office, where I was much shocked at being told of my 
friend's death. The postmaster handed me a telegram, which had been 
suffered to remain in a pigeon-hole for some days, instead of being sent on 
to the front. It was from the civil surgeon, who helped to soothe the last 
moments of my friend, and ran as follows : ' Captain the Hon. H. R. 
Gough is dying. He has been asking for you all day. Come down here if 
possible.' On subsequent inquiries at the hospital, I found that he had 
died at exactly the hour I fancied I had seen him outside the mess house 
at Gingihlovo. Prior to the occurrence I have narrated, I never had the 
faintest belief in the actuality of supernatural l phenomena of any nature. 

" (Late Lieutenant 4th Battalion Royal Dublin Fusiliers.)" 

Miss I. F. Galwey writes to us from 5, Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin: 

" May 18th, 1885. 

" I met two of young Gough's cousins on Saturday ; and they assure me 
that the account given by Mr. Stephens if a perfectly authentic one, 
and is fully believed by all the family ; but they know nothing of Mr. 
Stephens, except that he was a comrade of poor Rudolph's, and that just 
before his death he had expressed an earnest desire to see him." 

[The London Gazette for July 22nd, 1879, gives the date of the death 
of Captain Gough as April 19th. It seems very probable that the " 17th " 
in Mr. Stephens' account is a misprint. For if he inquired at the 
hospital and learnt the identity of hour, it is not likely that he made so 
grave a mistake as to the day. But from the South African Campaign oj 
1879, by J. R. Mackinnon, we learn that Captain Gough had been 
desperately ill for some days before his death ; so that even if the vision 
did precede the death by two days, it might still be connected with his 
condition. It is clear, too, from the words of the telegram that his 
thoughts had been directed to the percipient for some little time before his 

It might perhaps seem that this case ought to have been disallowed, 
on the principle that, when the percipient is in anxiety about the 
person whose phantasm appears, there is an appreciable chance that 
the appearance is the purely subjective creation of his own brain 
(Vol. I., pp. 508-9). But it would, perhaps, be a trifle pedantic to apply 
this principle to cases which occur in the thick of a war, where the 
idea of death is constant and familiar. In such circumstances, the 

1 I must once again disclaim all responsibility for this and similar expressions on the 
part of informants. 


mental attitude caused by the knowledge that a comrade is in peril 
seems scarcely parallel to that which similar knowledge might pro- 
duce among those who are sitting brooding at home. At any rate, 
if anxiety for the fate of absent comrades be a natural and known 
source of hallucinations during campaigns, it is odd that, among several 
hundreds of cases of subjective hallucination, I find no second instance 
of the phenomenon. 

The following account is from a lady, Miss H., whose name and 
address may be given to private inquirers, and who would gladly have 
allowed its publication had friends not been unwilling. Having 
stated that on Thursday, November 16th, 1854, about 10 o'clock at 
night, she had a vision of an intimate friend, who died that evening 
at 7, she was asked to furnish particulars, and replied : 

"November, 1885. 

(232) "I had had 16 hours' travelling in the interior of a diligence, 
crossing the Apennines from Bologna to Florence. I was perfectly well, but 
unusually tired. I was in- the Hotel Europa, in Florence, and was quite 
wide awake, not having had the necessary moments in which to compose 
myself to sleep. My sister had just fallen asleep. My friend stood at the 
side of the bed nearest to me, near the foot, and looked at me fixedly. She 
was in white, and looked exactly as she did in life. She was an old lady, 
and had been almost bedridden for long. She had taken very keen 
interest in our Italian tour. I lost my presence of mind, and woke my 
sister. I also called out to my father, who was in the adjoining room, not 
yet asleep, but too tired to do more than answer, though he remembered 
the circumstance of my calling to him the next morning. Directly this 
alarm was shown, the vision disappeared. It was both vivid, and produced 
a supernatural sensation which I never before or since experienced to 
anything like the same extent. " E. H. H." 

We find from the Times obituary that the death took place on 
Thursday, November 16th, 1854. Inquiries have been made at the hotel 
in Florence, in order to obtain confirmation of the date of Miss H.'s 
stay there : but the hotel changed hands a few years later, and the 
information cannot be got. 

Miss H. has experienced only one other hallucination, and that was 
" in the height of a severe illness," when she fancied her maid was 
at the bedside. In answer to inquiries, she writes that the sister who 
was with her cannot recall the occurrence ; and adds : 

"The fact is she only woke for an instant, and as she is 9 years 
younger than myself, and I saw she believed I had only been dreaming 
this, I spared her. I had not fallen asleep. I did not argue the point 
with her, or refer to it again for some long time after. It was the 
same with my father. I called out Mrs. W.'s name, and he referred-, 
to it as a dream in the morning. But I confided in a sister, then 
recently married to a Norfolk clergyman, who was very near my own age. 
I was the more led to do this as the lady who stood near me was her 
husband's mother. The account goes on to say how exceptionally 



interested the lady had been in the route and experience of the travellers ; 
and concludes thus : " In those days such things were subjects of ridicule 
and unbelief more than they now are, and I am surprised how lightly I 
took what yet I felt positive was no dream." 

The sister to whom Miss H. mentioned her experience writes to her as 
follows, on December 4th, 1885 : 

" MY DEAR ELISB, I fully remember your naming the vision of Mrs. 
W. which you had on the very evening on which she died. We compared 
notes faithfully at the time; and it was most remarkable because she 
had not been visibly worse, and died at the last suddenly. She had 
thought a great deal about you being in a Roman Catholic country at 
the time of some great council, and had named in two or three letters that 
she should be glad when you got home ; so you were on her mind. I 
believe you named it in a letter, but I can't find it. But I am as sure 
of the fact of your telling me (on your return home, and coming here on 
the way) all particulars as if it was yesterday the rooms en suite, and 
our father hearing you call out to Memie, who had fallen asleep before 
you ; and you naming ' Mrs. W.' to father, and he, supposing it was a 
dream, trying to soothe you. And you, though feeling sure you were 
awake, yet tried to think it was a sort of dream ' as when one awaketh.' 
The first news you received from England was the account of the 
peaceful and rather sudden death of one who was renowned for energy 
of spirit all her life, and who was full of imagination and great love for 
you. This is my statement. The dates were carefully compared, that I 
am sure of. My husband is as certain as I am of all I say. Your 
affectionate sister, "M. A. W." 

The next case, like the last, seems fairly to fall among waking 
rather than "borderland" impressions, since a special reason is 
remembered for wakefulness. It is, however, still more remote, and 
depends on a single memory. The Rev. H. E. Noyes, of Christ 
Church Vicarage, Kingstown, a nephew of Mrs. G., the narrator, 
(formerly of the Parsonage, Kingstown,) vouches for the strength of 
the impression made on her. " 1883. 

(233) "On February 26, 1850, I was awake, for I was to go to my 
sister-in-law, at Kingstown, and visiting was then an event to me. About 
2 o'clock in the morning my brother walked into our room (my sister's) and 

stood beside my bed. I called to her, ' There is .' He was at the time 

quartered at Paisley, and a mail car from Belfast passed, about that hour, 
not more than about half a mile from our village. When he could get a 
short leave, he liked to come in upon us and give us a delightful surprise. 
I even recollect its crossing my mind what there was in the house ready 
that we could give him to eat. He looked down most lovingly and kindly, 
and waved his hand and he was gone. I recollect it all as if it were only last 
night it all occurred, and my feeling of astonishment, not at his coming in- 
to the room at all, but at where he could have gone. At that hour he died." 

We have confirmed the date of death in the Army List, and find 
from a newspaper notice that the death took place in the early morning, 
and was extremely sudden. 


The next account was given to us by Mrs. Swithinbank, of 
Ormleigh, Mowbray Road, Upper Norwood. The incident occurred 
about 1867. " 1882. 

(234) " When my son H. was a boy, I one day saw him off to school, 
watching him down the Grove, and then went into the library to sit, a 
room I rarely used at that time of the day. Shortly after, he appeared, 
walking over the wall opposite the window. The wall was about 13 feet 
distant from the window and low, so that when my son stood on it his 
face was on a level with mine, and close to me. I hastily threw up the 
sash, and called to ask why he had returned from school, and why he was 
there ; he did not answer, but looked full at me with a frightened expres- 
sion, and dropped down the other side of the wall and disappeared. Never 
doubting but that it was some boyish trick, I called a servant to tell him 
to come to me, but not a trace of him was to be found, though there was 
no screen or place of concealment. I myself searched with the same result. 

" As I sat still wondering where and how he had so suddenly disappeared 
a cab drove up with H. in an almost unconscious state, brought home by a 
friend and schoolfellow, who said that during a dictation-lesson he had 
suddenly fallen backward over his seat, calling out in a shrill voice, 
1 Mamma will know,' and became insensible. He was ill that day, 
prostrate the next ; but our doctor could not account for the attack, nor 
did anything follow to throw any light on his appearance to me. That the 
time of his attack exactly corresponded with that at which I saw his figure 
was proved both by his master and class-mates." 

The Rev. H. Swithinbank, eldest son of the writer of the above, 
explains that the point at which the figure was seen was in a direct line 
between the house (situated at Summerhill Terrace, Newcastle-on-Tyne) 
and the school, but that " no animal but a bird could come direct that 
way," and that the walking distance between the two places was nearly a 
mile. He describes his brother as of a nervous temperament, but his 
mother as just the opposite, a calm person, who has never in her life had 
any other similar experience. 

The next account is from Colonel Swiney, of the Duke of Cornwall's 
Regiment. Possibly, in this as in some other cases, publication may 
lead to our obtaining corroborative evidence from persons to whom we 
have as yet been unable to apply for it. 

" Richmond Barracks, Dublin, July 14th, 1885. 

(235) "It was some time in the latter end of September, 1864, when 
quartered at Shornclifie Camp, I thought I saw my eldest brother (whom at 
the time I believed to be in India, where he was serving in the Royal 
Engineers) walking towards me, and before I could recover from my 
astonishment, the figure had disappeared. I perfectly well remember 
mentioning the fact to some of my brother officers, and saying how . 
curious it was, but never thought much about it until I received news of 
his death, which had occurred about (as near as I can recollect, without 
having made any note) the time I had imagined I had seen him viz., 
September 24th, 1864 at Nagpore, East Indies, and but for the fact of 
his death, I should never probably have recalled the circumstance. I do 

VOL. II. B 2 


not attach much importance to this ; it might have been a coincidence, 
remarkable certainly, but nothing more. I am afraid it will not be of 
much use to you in your inquiries, as half its value is gone by my not 
being able to bring corroborative evidence to prove that I had mentioned 
the fact prior to hearing of his death, although in my own mind I am 
perfectly certain I did so. Richard Edgcumbe was quartered at Shorn- 
cliffe at the very time this occurred. g_ Q SWINEY." 

[It was from Mr. R. Edgcumbe that we first heard of this incident. 
He did not himself hear of it until some years after its occurrence.] 
In answer to inquiries Colonel Swiney adds : 

(1) "Years afterwards, in 1871, at the Cape of Good Hope, I wrote 
a long account of it to a Yorkshire gentleman who was collecting data on 
the subject of hallucination. 

(2) " I have had a personal interview with Colonel Schwabe, who was 
a subaltern with me in the Carabineers, and he cannot recall the cir- 
cumstances at all, indeed has no recollection whatever about it. This 
may be accounted for by the fact of his having gone abroad very shortly 
afterwards, and we did not meet for some months after I had heard of 
my brother's death. At the time I heard of his death I was stopping 
with Charles Gurney, shooting, near Norwich, some time the latter end 
of October, if not the beginning of November. When I received the 
letter I knew what was in it ; and if I only knew Charles Gurney's 
address, I should like to have asked him if he ever remembers the morning 
I received the bad news before I left for London, saying ' How curious ; 
I thought I saw him coming towards me at Shorncliffe a few weeks ago.' 

(3) "The 24th of September, 1864, was a Sunday. I cannot say 
whether that was the day I mentioned it. My brother died some time, 
as far as I can recollect, after the family with whom he was stopping had 
returned from church ; for I remember the letter saying : ' He was so 
much better, and asleep, that we thought it safe to leave him for an hour 
or so. On our return,' it went on to say, ' we found he was very 
feverish, and he died that afternoon.' Now the time I saw the hallucina- 
tion could not have been later than 2 p.m. Allowing for the five hours 
difference of longitude, that would be about 9 a.m., and would not tally." 

[Colonel Swiney seems to have reckoned the difference the wrong way, 
At any moment the time of day in India is four or five hours later than 
the time of day in England ; and thus, if the days were the same, the 
death and the vision may have coincided exactly.] 

The Army List for December, 1864, and Allen's Indian Mail for 
October 20th, 1864, give the date of Lieut. John D. Swiney's death as 
September 25th ; and it was the 25th, not the 24th, that fell on a Sunday. 
When Colonel Swiney heard of the death he was clearly under the 
impression that his experience had occurred on a Sunday which is a 
marked day ; and his subsequent mistake as to the day of the month seems 
therefore unimportant. 

The next case is from Miss Bale, of Church Farm, Gorleston. 

"September 17th, 1885. 

(236) " In the June of 1880, 1 went to a situation as governess. On the 
first day of my going there, after retiring for the night, I heard a noise which 


was like the ticking of a watch. I took no particular notice of it, but I 
noticed that every time I was alone I heard it, more especially at night. 
I even went so far as to search, thinking there must be a watch concealed 
somewhere in the room. This continued until I grew quite accustomed to 
it. It was on the 12th of July, when I was coming from the dining-room 
with a tray of glasses that I saw what appeared to me to be a dark figure 
standing just outside the door, with outstretched arms. It startled me, 
and when I turned to look again it was gone. 

" On the 23rd September I received news that my brother was 
drowned on the 1 2th of July. I heard the ticking up to the time I had 
the letter, but never once afterwards. 

"P. A. BALE." 

Writing again, Miss Bale says : 

" I enclose the letter informing us of my brother's death, also one from 
the captain of the ship, for your perusal. 

" I made no entry in my diary of the apparition I saw on the 12th of 
July, but I distinctly remember the time. I sat down a little while to 
recover my fright, and then I looked at the time ; it was 20 minutes past 6. 
I enclose the address of a friend who I am sure remembers it as well as I do. 
You will see by enclosed where my brother was when he met with his death. 

" The apparition did remind me of my brother, as I last saw him in a 
long dark ulster, and it was about his height, but that was all I could dis- 
cover, for when I looked a second time it was gone. What made me 
mention the ticking was the peculiarity of its following me everywhere, 
providing I was alone." 

The enclosed letter, written by the Rev. W. A. Purey-Cust on board 
the Ship " Melbourne," announced that Mr. William Bale's death occurred 
at 6 p.m., on July 12th, 1880, about 150 miles south of Tristan d'Acunha, 
longitude 12 deg. 30" W. Mr. Purey-Cust has since told us that on that 
day and on that day only the position of the ship had to be found by dead 
reckoning, the sun not being visible. The error in time arising in this way 
could not, however, have amounted to more than a minute or two, and Mr. 
Purey-Cust gives particulars which make it almost impossible that he can be 
mistaken in stating that the accident occurred at 6 p. m, by the ship's clock. 

Mrs. Hart, of Baker Street, Gorleston, writes to us : 

" September 28th, 1885. 

" On the night of the 12th of July, 1880, Miss Bale came to my house 
to supper, and she told me that she was coming from the drawing-room 
and she saw a dark figure standing just outside the door ; she appeared 
very nervous. She said it reminded her of her brother, and remarked to 
me then that she knew something must have happened to him. I asked 
her if she noticed the time she saw it, and she told me that the apparition 
had startled her very much, and she had sat down a little time to recover 
the fright it gave her, and then she looked at the time ; it was 6.20. She 
had previously told me of a ticking she heard everywhere she went, so long . 
as she was alone, but directly anyone joined her it ceased ; and she told 
me she heard it up to the day she received the news of her brother's death, 
but not afterwards. 

"H. HART." 

Miss Bale adds : 


"September 24th, 1885. 

" There was one incident I did not tell you, thinking it too trivial, as I 
did not notice the date or hour, but I know it was shortly before I heard 
the news of my brother's death. I had been in bed a short time, and I 
heard a tremendous crash like the smashing of a lot of china. I felt too 
nervous to go and see what it was, but nothing was broken or disturbed in 
the morning, and for three nights in succession I heard the same. I am not 
inclined to think that it was in any way corresponding with my brother's 
death. I certainly have never heard imaginary voices nor seen imaginary 
figures except the apparition I saw the day my brother was drowned." 

[There seems to be no reason for connecting the ticking sound with 
Mr. Bale's death, any more than the crash of china ; and it is probable 
that it was due to a merely physical affection, to which the shock of 
receiving the news perhaps put an end. It seemed right, however, to 
mention it ; since, if it was a hallucination, it would tend to show that 
Miss Bale was for some time in a condition favourable to purely subjective 
hallucinations -which would slightly weaken the force of the coincidence 
of the visual hallucination with her brother's death. It will be noticed 
that, allowing for longitude, the death occurred according to the state- 
ments made about half-an-hour after the apparition But as the 
difference is so small, it seems more probable that it is due to error in 
Miss Bale's observation or memory, or in the time of her clock, than that 
so close a coincidence was purely accidental.] 

The next few cases, though depending in the first instance on 
witnesses in a humbler station, are, as far as I can judge, faithfully 
reported. The narrator of the first of them is Ellen M. Greany, a 
trusted and valued servant in the family of Miss Porter, at 16, Russell 

Square, W.C. 

"May 20th, 1884. 

(237) " I sat one evening reading, when on looking up from my book, I 
distinctly saw a school-friend of mine, to whom I was very much attached, 
standing near the door. I was about to exclaim at the strangeness of her 
visit, when, to my horror, there were no signs of any one in the room but 
my mother. I related what I had seen to her, knowing she could not 
have seen, as she was sitting with her back towards the door, nor did she 
hear anything unusual, and was greatly amused at my scare, suggesting I 
had read too much or been dreaming. 

" A day or so after this strange event, I had news to say my friend was 
no more. The strange part was I did not even know she was ill, much 
less in danger, so could not have felt anxious at the time on her account, 
but may have been thinking of her ; that I cannot testify. Her illness 
was short, and death very unexpected. Her mother told me she spoke of 
me not long before she died, and wondered I had not been to see her, 
thinking, of course, I had some knowledge of her illness, which was not 
the case. It may be as well to mention she left a small box she prized 
rather, to be given to me in remembrance of her. She died the same 
evening and about the same time that I saw her vision, which was the end 
of October, 1874. " ELLEN M. GREANY." 


In answer to an inquiry, Ellen Greany adds that this hallucination is 
the only one she has ever experienced. She tells Miss Porter that she 
went to see her dead friend before the funeral, which accords with her 
statement that she heard the news of the death very soon after it 
occurred ; and there is no reason to doubt that, at the time when she 
heard the news, she was able correctly to identify the day of her vision. 

Her mother corroborates as follows : 

" Acton, July, 1884. 

" I can well remember the instance my daughter speaks of. I know 
she was not anxious at the time, not knowing her friend was ill. I took 
no notice of it at the time, as I do not believe in ghosts, but thought it 
strange the next day, when we heard she was dead, and died about the 
same time that my daughter saw her. 


[I have seen Ellen Greany, who is a superior and intelligent person. 
She went over her story without prompting, giving an entirely clear and 
consistent account, and standing cross-examination perfectly. But the 
favourable effect of such an interview on one's own mind cannot, of course, 
be conveyed to others.] 

The following account was first published in The Englishman, on 
May 13th, 1876. 

(238) " A labourer named Duck, employed by Mr. Dixon, of Mildenhall 
Warren Farm, near Marlborough, was in charge of a horse and water-cart 
on the farm, when the animal took fright and knocked him down. The 
wheel went over his chest, and he died shortly afterwards. Immediately 
after the accident, Mr. Dixon despatched a woman to Ramsbury, where 
Duck lived, to make known the fact to his wife. On arriving at her home 
the messenger found her out gathering wood, but shortly after a girl, who 
was her companion, arrived, and without being told of what had occurred, 
volunteered the statement that Ria (Mrs. Duck) was unable to do much 
that morning, that she had been very much frightened, having seen her 
husband in the wood. Shortly afterwards Mrs. Duck returned without 
any wood, and being informed by a neighbour that a woman from 
Mildenhall Woodlands wished to see her, ejaculated ' My David's dead 
then.' Inquiry has since been made by Mr. Dixon of the woman, and she 
positively asserts that she saw her husband in the wood, and said, ' Hallo, 
David, what wind blows you here ? ' and that he made no answer. Mr. 
Dixon inquired what time this occurred, and she replied about 10 o'clock, 
the time at which the fatal accident occurred." 

On the appearance of this account, our friend, Mr. F. W. Percival, of 
36, Bryanston Street, W., wrote to Mr. Dixon to inquire into the facts, 
and received from him the following confirmation : 

" May 25th, 1876. 

"As soon as it happened (Duck's death), I sent one of my female 
servants to inform his wife of the sad occurrence, to a place called 
Ramsbury, about four miles from where it occurred. But when she got 


there, his wife was gone to get wood at a distant wood, the woman stopping 
for her return at an adjoining cottage. But Maria returned without any 
wood, saying she had seen her husband, and asked him how he came there 
telling the woman that she knew her business, that she was come to inform 
her of her husband's death, and that she had seen him as plain as ever she 
did in her life, and said to him, 'Hallo, David, what wind blew you 
here ] ' but as she saw him no more, she became much frightened, and left 
the wood." 

"June 1st, 1876. 

" The woman I sent told me, when she got to Ramsbury to Duck's 
house, her neighbour told her that she was gone to get wood and her (the 
neighbour's) little girl was gone with her. The girl soon returned saying 
Maria Duck was much frightened in the wood, and had seen her husband 
and spoken to him, but as he made no reply she became faint, and told the 
girl to go home, as she knew something had happened to David. That was 
before she knew the woman was sent. When she got home and found the 
woman waiting for her return she said she knew her errand, and asked 
her if her husband was not dead, and seemed much frightened, the woman 
telling her he was very ill, and thought he would not be living to see her 
again. When she got to Warren, she found him dead, and told us the 
time she saw him, which was exactly the time he lost his life ; therefore I 
think the public is bound to believe it, although it seems to us quite a 
mystery. Duck's wife is now in Hungerford Union, her home broken up 
by his death. The woman I sent is Mary Holick, has been living with me 
some time, and her word is to be relied on. 


Mrs. Duck has since died; but Mrs. Holick dictated and signed the 
following account : 

"January 26th, 1886. 

" I well remember about poor old David Duck. I am never likely to 
forget it. The cart-wheel passed over his chest and killed him, and I 
was sent down by Mr. Dixon to tell his wife at Ramsbury. She was not 
at home ; she was out gathering wood with the little girl of a neighbour ; 
so I went to this neighbour's house to wait. Presently the little girl came 
in, and said that Mrs. Duck was in a great way because she had seen her 
husband in the wood, and when she spoke to him and said, 'What wind blows 
you here, Davie ? ' he disappeared away, and she fell back on the bank 
half fainting with fright ; and the little girl ran down and found her like 
it. So she had gathered very little wood. If the little girl had not told 
me first, I never could have really believed that she had seen him. But 
when she came back, about half-an-hour after the little girl (who had come 
on in front, full of what Mrs. Duck had seen), it was all true. I shall 
never forget her ; she came in with her hands stretched out, and said, 
looking at me, ' She has come to tell me that my Davie is killed. I knew 
he was ; I have seen his ghost. I didn't need anyone to tell me.' And 
then she told us, afterwards, how she had suddenly seen him in front of 
her, in his usual clothes ; and how she spoke to him, and he vanished. 
She lived about half a mile from the woman I was waiting with ; and we 
sent another woman to her house to tell her, when she came home, that 
a person from Mr. Dixon's wanted to see her. So directly she told her, 


she said, ' She has come to tell me my poor Da vie is killed ; but I didn't 
want anyone to tell me, for I know ; I have just seen his ghost.' And the 
woman said, ' Don't give way now, but come with me, there's a good 
woman.' And they came ; and I shall never forget her as she came 
stumbling up the steps, and looked at me and said, ' For God's sake tell 
me ; my Davie is dead.' She had seen him just as natural as life, every 
bit ; but the little girl never saw anything, only she knew Mrs. Duck had, 
when she helped her off the bank, where she fell when he disappeared. 
She was a very good woman, I think, and her husband was a very quiet 
man ; and she was as strong as any man, and worked hard from early 

We find from the Register of Deaths that David Duck died on 
March 31, 1874. 

[Mrs. Holick's account fairly comes into the class of evidence reckoned 
as on a par with first-hand (Vol. I., p. 148) ; as, though she did not 
actually receive a description of the apparition from Mrs. Duck's own lips 
before Mrs. Duck heard the fatal news, she saw her in the state of 
agitation, and heard her express the conviction, which the apparition had 
produced. Mrs. Holick is quite clear that she herself was the first to 
communicate the news.] 

In the next example accident has made the evidence for the facts 
very fairly strong ; but the case is to some extent weakened by the 
percipient's knowledge that the person whose phantasm he saw was 
ill. The case was first described to us by a clergyman as follows : 

"March 5th, 1885. 

(239) "Some 18 or 19 years ago, I remember calling on a working 
maltster, whose employer was living at Lincoln. His employer was ill at 
the time, and I asked the man if he had heard from him lately. ' No,' he 
said, ' but I am afraid he is dead.' And on my inquiring why he thought 
so, he replied that on going out that morning early, he had seen his em- 
ployer standing on the top of the steps that lead up to the kiln door, as 
plainly as he ever had seen him in his life. 

It was as he expected : the first news that came reported his 
employer's death. 

" I have no doubt the man I speak of either saw this appearance, or 
believed he saw it." 

In answer to inquiries, this informant says : 

"March 12th, 1885. 

" Since receiving your letter, I have had the curiosity to look over my 
old diaries, thinking I might have made a note of the occurrence, and 
under the date .of Thursday, the 22nd of October, 1863, I find the 

following : ' Report of Mr. W.'s death. M. saw his " wraith " on 


Tuesday morning about 5 o'clock.' 

" This differs somewhat from what I told you in my last letter, for I 
said that the man had seen the appearance that same morning in which I 
spoke with him. Here it seems it was two days before. But still he had 


told me before it was known for a certainty that Mr. W. was dead. For 
you observe the word ' dead ' put in over the yy. This I know from my 
own habit was put in afterwards. There is no communication between 
this place and Lincoln, except on the market day, Friday. At that time 
of year, moreover, the carriers who go to Lincoln would not get back 
before night, and consequently I should most probably not have learned 
the certainty of the report until some time on Saturday. Then, instead of 
making a new note of it, I simply put in the word ' dead ' to show that 
the report was true when I first heard it. Moreover, I used the Scotch 
word ' wraith ' instead of ' ghost ' or ' spirit,' as I had an idea that the 
former word was applied to appearances before death. 

" I observe that the man said ' about 5 o'clock.' Of course, this would 
be a vague expression for any time up to 5.30, or thereabouts, when the 
morning would not be very clear perhaps, but sufficiently so to enable one to 
see an object some 10 or 12 yards off, and I am not sure it was quite so much. 
" I cannot say that Mr. W. was dead at the time M. saw the appear- 
ance, but he was certainly dead at the time he told me of it, otherwise I 
should not have inserted the word ' dead ' where I did. 

I may add that Mr. "W. had formerly lived in this village, and I had 
known him well. He had gone to live in Lincoln only a short time before 
his death. His malt kiln was his only means of providing for his wife and 
family five or six young children and he had been in the habit of 
coming over to see how things went on, twice a week. There is nothing 
more natural than that his thoughts (and they must have been very 
anxious thoughts) should have been fixed on that one place." 

The following is the percipient's own account : 

"Ridley's Yard, North Gate, Newark, Notts., March 16th, 1885. 

" I have received your letter asking me to forward you what I said 
about my dear Mr. Wright, for he was a very good master. I said I saw 
him standing on the steps, with one hand on the handrail ; my light went 
out, and I saw no more, and he died, and I hope he is at rest. That was 
at 4 o'clock in the morning, before he departed from us. j ]yj; ERRILL 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Merrill adds, on April 6, 1885 : 
" I am very sorry to let you know that I do not remember the date 
that dear Mr. Wright died, but I think it was the latter end of 
1863. I looked my old books over, but, with the trade being carried on 
in the same way, I have nothing to go by. I saw him as plain as in the 
middle of the day, for he stood just the same as he did when he came at 
noon, looking on to the house for me to go to him. I never saw anything 
before, to my mind." [The last sentence is in answer to the question 
whether the above was his only experience of a hallucination.] 

We find from the Register of Deaths that Mr. Wright died on 
October 22, 1863, of " gastric fever." The apparition therefore took place 
two days before the death, but no doubt at a time of critical illness. In 
conversation, Mr. Merrill's wife stated that she remembered laughing at 
her husband's account of his strange experience when he returned home. 
Neither of them seems to have then connected the apparition with the idea 
of death. 

The following case was written down by our valued helper, Miss 


Porter, from the account of Mrs. Banister, of Eversley, mother of the 
percipient, Mrs. Ellis, of Portesbery Road, Camberley, who has signed 

it as correct. 

" August 5th. 

(240) " In September, 1878, I, then residing in York Town, Surrey, 
three times during the day distinctly saw the face of an old friend, Mr. 
James Stephenson, who I afterwards heard died that day in Eversley, five 
miles off'. I saw it first about half -past 10 in the morning; the last time 
it was nearly 6 o'clock. I knew him to be ill. 

(Signed) " MARY ELLIS." 

A memorial card shows that Mr. Stephenson died on Sept. 19, 1878. 

Mr. Stephenson had not been on friendly terms with Mrs. Banister or 
her daughter ; but Mrs. Banister, by his desire, went to see him just before 
his death. 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Ellis says: 

" I told my husband, and a young man, whose name is Swiney, at the 
tea-table the same afternoon, and after leaving the table to go into another 
room I saw it again which was the last time. I did not hear of Mr. 
Stephenson's death until' the next day, nor did I know that he was so 
near death. My husband remembers it well, but the children were then 
too young to notice such a thing. I have never seen anything like it 
before or since, and I hope I never shall again. 


Mr. Ellis writes : 

" I quite well remember my wife speaking of the figure that she had 
seen during the day. The next day we heard of Mr. Stephenson's death. 

"E. J. ELLIS." 

Mr. Herbert Swiney, writing on September 29th, 1885, from Tregar- 
then House, Romford Road, Forest Gate, says that he only faintly 
recollects the matter. 

If correctly reported, this case presents two of the rarer features 
which are common to telepathic and to purely subjective hallucina- 
tions ; the fragmentary nature of the percept a face only, and the 
repetition after an interval of some hours. 1 

The next case must be reckoned as one of non-recognition, as the 
resemblance between the phantasm and the person who died was 
not remarked until the fact of death was known. The narrator, Mr. 
S. J. Masters, of 87, Clifford Crescent, Southampton, will hardly be 

accused of excessive sentimentality. 

"December 14th, 1882. 

(241) " Last Easter Sunday, I was retiring to bed, just after 1 1 o'clock,, 
and had stepped off the stairs on the landing that led to my room (my 
parents' bedroom door being in front of me, about 10 or 12ft., and my door 

1 As to the first point see above, p. 33, note ; as to the second, see Vol. i., p. 446, an 
below p. 237, note. 


being about 2ft. to the right, so that I had to pass it to get to my room). 
I saw their bedroom door was open, and I was rivetted to the spot by 
seeing standing in the room doorway in front of me, a figure of a female ; 
although I could not distinguish the dress, I could plainly see the features, 
and especially the eyes. I must have stood there at least 20 seconds, for 
my mother, hearing me stop suddenly before reaching my room, at last 
opened the door (below) and asked what was the matter. I then came 
downstairs and stopped with them till we all retired together. The figure 
collapsed when my mother called upstairs, and the light I held in my hand 
shone through the doorway to the opposite wall, which had been obscured 
by the figure, as if it had had a tangible body. 

" It was not till the following Wednesday that my mother, on reading 
the mid-weekly local paper, saw the death of a young lady with whom I 
had once kept company for a short time. On inquiry, I found she died 
about the same time as I saw the apparition. I feel convinced it was her, 
for the eyes had the same expression, although I could not recognise her 
at the time ; not having seen the girl for quite six months, I had almost 
forgotten her existence. She died in decline, which accounts for her not 
being about the town before her death. 


We find from the Register of Deaths that the death took place on 
March 5, 1882. This was a Sunday, but not Easter Sunday. The 
mention of the Wednesday paper seems also to be a mistake ; as the death 
does not appear in the Wednesday issue of either of the two bi-weekly 
Southampton papers, though it appears in the Saturday issue of one of 
them, on March llth. These mistakes are not important. For even apart 
from Mr. Masters' observation of the coincidence at the time, Easter 
Sunday seems a very unlikely day to have been named, if the experience 
had really fallen on a week-day ; and if it fell on a Sunday, there is no 
reason to doubt that it fell on the Sunday before the announcement of the 
death i.e., on the day of the death. 

The narrator's mother corroborates as follows : 

" I remember, perfectly well, the circumstance, and the effect it pro- 
duced on my son at the time. He is not of a nervous disposition, nor 
a believer in anything at all approaching Spiritualism, as we all belong 
to the Church. His father and I thought it might betoken the death 
of some near friend or relative, having heard of such things, but never 
had seen so direct an appearance ourselves. 


[Mr. Masters has reason to think that the young lady's attachment 
to him had continued. He reports that on more exact inquiry, he 
finds the death to have occurred within a quarter-of-an-hour of the 
apparition probably after rather than before it. Asked if he had ever 
experienced any other hallucinations, he replied in the negative.] 

The next case is one of the most singular in our collection. It is 
from Mrs. Clerke, of Clifton Lodge, Farquhar Road, Upper Norwood, 


"October 30th, 1885. 

(242) " In the month of August, 1864, about 3 or 4 o'clock in the after- 
noon, I was sitting reading in the verandah of our house in Barbadoes. 
My black nurse was driving my little girl, about 18 months or so old, in 
her perambulator in the garden. I got up after some time to go into the 
house, not having noticed anything at all when this black woman said to 
me, ' Missis, who was that gentleman that was talking to you just now 1 ' 
' There was no one talking to me,' I said. ' Oh, yes, dere was, Missis a 
very pale gentleman, very tall, and he talked to you, and you was very 
rude, for you never answered him.' I repeated there was no one, and got 
rather cross with the woman, and she begged me to write down the day, 
for she knew she had seen someone. I did, and in a few days I heard of 
the death of my brother in Tobago. Now, the curious part is this, that / 
did not see him, but she a stranger to him did ; and she said that he 
seemed very anxious for me to notice him. 


In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Clerke says : 

" (1) The day of death was the same, for I wrote it down. I think it 
was the 3rd of August, but I know it was the same. 

The description,' ' very tall and pale,' was accurate. 

I had no idea that he was ill. He was only a few days ill. 

The woman had never seen him. She had been with me for 
about 18 months, and I considered her truthful. She had no object in 
telling me." 

In conversation, I learned that Mrs. Clerke had immediately mentioned 
what the servant said, and the fact that she had written down the date, to 
her husband, Colonel Clerke, who corroborates as follows : 

" I well remember that on the day on which Mr. John Beresford, my 
wife's brother, died in Tobago after a short illness of which we were not 
aware our black nurse declared she saw, at as nearly as possible the time 
of his death, a gentleman, exactly answering to Mr. Beresford's descrip- 
tion, leaning over the back of Mrs. Clerke's easy-chair in the open 
verandah. The figure was not seen by any one else. 


We find it stated in Burke's Peerage that Mr. J. H. de la Poer 
Beresford, Secretary for the Island of Tobago, died on August 3, 1863 
(not 1864). 

If this incident is to be interpreted telepathically, it is scarcely 
possible to suppose that Mrs. Clerke's own presence did not play a part 
in the phenomenon. The case would then be comparable to some of 
the " collective " cases (to be cited in Chap. XVIII.), where one 
of the percipients is a stranger to the agent ; the difference being 
that here the person who should (so to speak) have been the principal 
percipient was as unconscious of the impression which she received 


as we have found the percipient to be in some of the experimental 
cases. 1 Another instance of the same kind is No. 355 (p. 256, and 
see p. 267). 

3. I will now give a group of cases in respect of which the 
hypothesis of mistaken identity has to be taken into account. The 
apparition in all of them was seen out-of-doors, and in several of them 
in the street which is the place where such mistakes are most liable 
to occur. Now, with respect to mistakes of identity, made at the 
time when the person who seems to be seen is really dying at a 
distance, one general remark has to be made namely, that cases in 
which they have occurred are not thereby at once put out of court, 
for the purpose of my argument. For if telepathic hallucinations 
are facts in nature, the possibility of telepathic illusions cannot 
reasonably be excluded. Illusions, as I have remarked, (Vol. I., p. 460,) 

1 As one more example of the psychological identity of hallucinations and dreams 
(Chap, xii., 5), I may quote an account of a dream which is an exact parallel to the above 
waking case. 

In the last week of February, 1885, Miss Harris, of 9, Queen Square, Bloomsbury, 
W.C., wrote to us as follows : 

" On Thursday night, the 19th of February, 1885, I dreamed the following dream. A 
servant, a Lincolnshire woman, has lived in our house for two years ; and of her, whom I 
never see in the day, I dreamt, as portentously as if her troubles were my own. There is 
nothing remarkable in this young woman's character or experience. She is but an ordinary 
rather rough specimen of a village girl, quiet and respectable. 

" In my dream a long country lane was before me ; in this I walked with the Lincoln- 
shire cook, without speaking ; yet I knew that my companion was going with me as a sort of 
escort to some errand of my own. Then a face appeared over the hedge, a solemn, silent 
face, exactly resembling that of the one who noiselessly moved beside me ; the sternest 
suffering was impressed upon the plain hard-lined countenance. From beside me the 
country servant instantly departed to follow the warning voiceless form through the 
hedge, into a little house. Only a long minute passed, and the servant rushed from the 
hedge, absolutely wringing her hands, crouching to the ground in dumb agony. ' 'Tis my 
sister called me, she beckoned me in ; but she will not speak : she will not have me with 
her.' As she spoke the vision returned. It looked over the low hedge, with the same 
indescribable expression of sadness unspeakable of a terrible woe impossible of utterance. 
It flung back its sleeve, and lifting one arm, pointed to a single white spot in the centre of 
a finger. And as suddenly as I had fallen on this dream, so suddenly \ awoke. I tried 
to cast off the shadow the dream had cast on me. But the same evening came the news 
that the country cook's sister was very ill, and had prematurely been confined with a 
child born dead. 


In answer to inquiries, Miss Harris adds : 

" Certainly I repeated my dream even before I left my room. I asked the housemaid 
whether she knew of any reason her fellow-servant might have to fear, or to hear bad 
news. She said, 'No, 'and after that I told my sister. Nothing was said about the 
dream during Friday. On Saturday morning, when I returned from a class having 
dismissed the occurrence from my mind for the time my sister immediately told me that 
the coincidence of dream and fact were marvellously similar. The poor woman whom I 
saw with such dumb appeal on her countenance, was alone, unable to speak, meeting her 
trouble alone, her husband, who is a policeman, being on night duty. She thought it was 
impossible to be heard, till she found a stick of his, and contrived to knock on the floor." 

Miss Harris's sister corroborates as follows : 

"March 16th, 1885. 

" It was directly I came out of my room, before I went down stairs, that my sister 
told me the dream she wrote to you about, and which she had dreamed between night and 



are merely the sprinkling of fragments of genuine hallucination on a 
background of true perception ; and it is surely not more difficult to 
suppose that a mind which is telepathically affected can project its 
sensory delusion on some real figure which bears a general resem- 
blance to the agent, than that it can project it in vacancy. But of 
course the coincidence with A's death of an illusion in which the 
perceiver mistook B for A would have far less force as evidence for 
telepathy than the coincidence with A's death of a hallucination 
representing him, simply because purely subjective mistakes as to 
identity are far commoner things than purely subjective hallucina- 
tions. To find the probability that a person will by accident make 
a particular mistake of identity on a particular day of his life, we 
must multiply the fraction number of d a y8 of Ms me b 7 the number of 
similar mistakes, in similar circumstances of light, distance, &c., 
that he makes altogether; and we must divide the result by the 
number of acquaintances any one of whom, if chance alone acted, is 
as likely as the one who died on the particular day to be the one 
wrongly identified on that day. This process may reduce the proba- 
bility of a telepathic explanation of the coincidence from odds of 
millions to 1 (as found in the case of hallucinations, pp. 18-20) to 
odds of thousands to 1 ; but in a cumulative argument, odds of 
that magnitude are clearly not to be neglected. However, with 
regard to the following specimens, or most of them, such considera- 
tions are hardly needed. They seem pretty certainly to be cases of 
hallucination, and stand, for instance, on different ground from the 
incidents mentioned above (Vol. I., pp. 123-4), where the hypothesis 
of mistaken identity seemed fairly plausible. 

The first account is from the Chevalier Sebastiano Fenzi, of the 
Palazzo Fenzi, Florence, a corresponding member of the S.P.R. The 
peculiar melancholy described as preceding the vision may possibly 
exemplify the gradual emergence of telepathic impressions into 
consciousness, which was exemplified in Chap. XII., 3. 

" November 13th, 1883. 

(243) " Some months before his demise, my brother (Senator Carlo 
Fenzi) one day, as we were driving to town together from our villa of St. 
Andrea, told me that if he should be summoned first, he would endeavour 
to prove to me that life continued beyond the chasm of the grave, and that* 
I was to promise him the same in case I went first; 'but,' said he, 'I 
am sure to go first, and, mind you, I feel quite sure that before the year 
is out nay, in three months I shall be no more.' This was said in June 
and he died on the 2nd of September, the same year, 1881. 


" Now, on that fatal morning (the 2nd of September), I was some 70 
miles away from Florence, namely, at Fortullino, a villa of ours on a rock 
on the sea, 10 miles south-east of Leghorn. Well, at about half -past 10 in 
the morning, I was seized with a fit of deep melancholy a thing 
very unusual with me, who enjoy great serenity of mind. I had, 
however, no reason for being alarmed about my brother, who was then 
in Florence as, although he had not been very well, the latest news 
of him was very good, as my nephew had written to say, ' Uncle is doing 
very comfortably, and it cannot even be said that he has really been ill ' so 
that I could not account for this sudden gloomy impression ; yet the tears 
stood in my eyes, and in order not to burst out crying like a baby before 
our family party, I rushed out of the house without my hat on, although it 
was blowing a hurricane, and the rain fell in torrents, accompanied by 
permanent flashes of lightning, and the loud and unceasing roar of the 
sea and of thunder. 

" I ran and ran, and only stopped when I had reached the end 
of a spacious lawn, from whence are seen, close on the other side of 
a small stream (the Fortulla), the huge stones or rocks heaped on one 
another, and stretching for a good half mile along the sea coast. I 
there gazed to try and see a youth, a cousin of mine, who, having been 
born among the Zulus, retained enough of love for savage life to have 
yielded to the wish of going out in that terrible weather, ' to enjoy,' he 
said, ' the fury of the elements.' Judge of my surprise and astonishment 
when, instead of Giovanni (such is my cousin's name), I saw my brother, 
with a top hat and his big white moustachios, stepping leisurely along 
from one rock to another, as if the weather were fair and calm ! I could 
not believe my eyes ; and yet, there^he was he, unmistakeably ! I thought 
of rushing back to the house to call every one out to give him a hearty 
welcome, but then preferred waiting for him, and meanwhile waved my 
hand to him and called out his name as loud as I possibly could, although 
with the awful noise of wind, and sea, and thunder combined, nothing 
could naturally be heard. He meanwhile continued to advance, until, 
having reached a rock larger than the rest, he slipped behind it. The 
distance between myself and the rock was, as nearly as I can judge, not 
more than 60 paces. I waited for him to reappear on the other side but 
to no purpose, and I only saw Giovanni, who was just then emerging from 
a wood, and stepping on to the rocks. Giovanni, tall and slight, with a 
broad-brimmed hat and dark beard, was altogether a very different type, 
and I thought that my having seen Charles, my brother, must have been 
a freak of my sense of vision, and felt rather annoyed, and almost blushed 
at the idea that I. could have been so deceived by a sort of phantom of my 
own fancy ; yet could not help telling Giovanni, ' There must be some 
family likeness, for I must positively have taken you for Charles, although 
I cannot make out how you could have gone from behind the huge rock 
into the wood without my seeing you cross over.' ' / never was behind the 
rock,' he said, 'for when you saw me, I had but just put my foot on the 

"Meanwhile we went home, put on fresh clothes, and then joined the rest 
to breakfast. My melancholy had left me, and I conversed merrily with 
all the young people. After breakfast a telegram came, telling me and my 
daughter Christina to hasten home, as Carlo had suddenly been taken very 


ill. We made preparations to at once depart, and meanwhile another 
telegram came, urging us to make all possible haste, as the illness was 
making rapid strides, but although we caught the nearest train, we only 
arrived in Florence at night ; where we found, to our horror, that my 
brother had died just at the time when in the morning I had seen him on 
the rocks, when, feeling that his moments were numbered, he had been 
continually asking for me, regretting not to see me appear. 

" In kissing his cold forehead with intense sorrow, as we had lived 
together, and loved one another during our whole lives, I thought, ' Poor, 
dear Charlie ; he kept his word !' SEBASTIANO FENZI " 

In answer to inquiries, Chevalier Fenzi tells us that his "eyesight is 
excellent, especially at moderate distances." He has had one other 
experience of visual hallucination representing an unrecognised figure 
which was probably subjective. 

The " Giovanni " of the narrative corroborates as follows : 

"Athens, (English address, 131, Tavistock Street, Bedford). 

"May 3rd, 1884. 

" My cousin, Sebastiano Fenzi, of Florence, has sent me your letter of 
1 3th March last, with a request that I would give you my recollections of 
the strange circumstance attending the death of his brother, Carlo Fenzi, 
in September, 1881, a circumstance which made (and has left) a deep 
impression on my mind. I will endeavour to recall the whole circumstance. 
Nearly three years, it is true, have since passed, but my recollection of 
the event, on account of its strangeness, remains clear. 

"Passing through Italy in the autumn of 1881, I profited by the 
occasion to visit my relatives. At Milan I learnt that the major portion 
were at Fortullino, my cousin's seaside villa. Thither I accordingly 
went, arriving the last days of August. Fortullino is a charming villa, 
situated on the top of a cliff on the sea, and surrounded by deep growths 
of trees and shrubs. The weather, during the beginning of my stay, 
was very bad, rain, thunder, strong winds, and heavy sea. I remember 
that on the morning of my cousin's death none then dreamed the end 
was near indulging in a favourite weakness (?). I started off alone for 
an escapade along the shore. Descending by the hillside to the beach, I 
passed on, leaping from boulder to boulder, climbing over, or passing 
round them when too huge, past a bend, which hid me from a view of 
the villa, for some distance along the shore. 

" Returning for breakfast, I found the rain (driven into my face by 
the wind) blinding, and, fearing an accident, entered the wood. The 
undergrowth of the shrubs, and the wet state of the ground, urged me to 
try the open again. This I did, emerging just inside the bend, in full 
sight of the house. To my surprise I saw my cousin standing on the edge 
of the cliff. When I approached him he remarked that there must be a 
strange family likeness, as he had mistaken me for his brother Carlo, 
being on the rocks, but wondered how I had managed to enter the wood 
unseen by him, and then suddenly leave it again. I replied that he had " 
not seen me on the rocks before leaving the wood (for I was out of sight). 
The matter shortly afterwards dropped. Scarcely was breakfast over than 
a wire arrived, summoning him and his daughter Christina to Florence, 
Carlo was very ill. They left at once, I staying, at their request, with 



the younger members at Fortullino. Our next news was that Carlo Fenzi 
had died about the very time that Sebastiano had fancied to have 
mistaken me for his brother. JoHN D OUGLAS DE FENZI." 

[Even apart from the evidence that " Giovanni " was not in sight 
when the figure was seen, it would be difficult to regard this as a case of mis- 
taken identity. For Chevalier Fenzi, being specially on the look out for 
" Giovanni," would be specially unlikely to mistake him for someone else.] 

Here we encounter a feature of which there are altogether nine 
examples in the present collection 1 a previous compact between the 
parties that the one who died first should endeavour to make the other 
sensible of his presence. Considering what an extremely small 
number of persons make such a compact, compared with those who 
do not, it is difficult to resist the conclusion that its existence has 
a certain efficacy. The cause of this might be sought in some 
quickening of the agent's thought, in relation to the percipient, as the 
time for fulfilment approached. But considering how often spontaneous 
telepathy acts without any conscious set of the distant mind towards 
the person impressed, it is safer to refer the phenomenon to the 
same sort of blind movements as seem sometimes, at supreme crises, to 
evoke a response out of memories and affinities that have long lapsed 
from consciousness (see Chap. XII., 9) ; on which view, the efficacy 
of the compact may quite as readily be conceived to depend on its 
latent place in the percipient's mind as in the agent's. 

In the next case from Major Owen, of 4, Grove Road, East- 
bourne the tie between the two parties was, we learn, one rather of 

blood than of affection. 

"November 17th, 1883. 

(244) " In the year 1870, I went one morning from my then home, in 
Clifton, to order various eatables for the day. On my way, I saw coming 
towards me, on the same side of the street, J. E. H., a male cousin. To 
avoid meeting him, I went across to the other side, and walked into a 
fishmonger's shop, and watched him pass on. I remained in the same 
place, looking into the street, and I saw him (or it) pass back again. I 
felt so annoyed at the idea of J. E. H. being in Clifton that I hurried 
home to tell my wife that I had seen J. E. H., and that he was evidently 
making inquiries as to our residence, and would certainly be here directly. 
I stayed at home all that morning, but J. E. H. never appeared. 

" The next day, or day after, I received a letter from a son of J. E. H., 
telling me his father had died the very day I had seen the apparition. 


In answer to inquiries, Mr. Owen says : 

1 See cases 146, 165, 169, 194, 355, 514, 526, 537 ; also Mr. Cooper's " ambiguous " case, 
Vol. i., p. 507. In case 210 there had been a request, but not a compact ; and in case 197 
a promise on the side of the person who died. 


"I have ascertained from the widow of J. E. H. that he died Tuesday, 
November 2nd, 1869, not as I wrote to you, 1870, between 2 and 3 p.m. 
I saw, as I believe to this moment, J. E. H., certainly before noon on that 
day. My wife can testify to the fact of my having seen J. E. H. before 
I heard of his death, as I went back to my house to tell her J. E. H. was 
in Clifton, and she must expect to see him any moment." 

Mrs. Owen corroborates as follows : 

" I perfectly recognise the circumstance detailed to you by my husband 
of his having, as he thought, seen J. E. H. walking in the streets of 
Clifton ; indeed, he came home on purpose to prepare me for his coming 
to our house, and the whole day we were expecting he would appear. 

" M. OWEN." 

[Major Owen has had no other hallucination, and his sight is excellent. 
In conversation, Mrs. Owen described J. E. H.'s figure to Mr. Podmore as 
unmistakeable ; very tall and thin, with small black eyes and a very small 

The next case is from the Rev. W. E. Button, of Lothersdale 
Rectory, Cononley, Leeds. It will be seen that the impression may 

possibly have been reciprocal. 

"January, 30th, 1885. 

(245) " I am not quite clear as to the exact date, but about the middle of 
June, in the year 1863, I was walking up the High Street of Hudders- 
field, in broad daylight, when I saw approaching me, at a distance of a few 
yards, a dear friend who I had every reason to believe was lying 
dangerously ill at his home in Staffordshire. A few days before, I had 
heard this from his friends. As the figure drew nearer, I had every 
opportunity of observing it ; and, although it flashed across my mind that 
his recovery had been sudden, I never thought of doubting that it was 
really my friend. As we met he looked into my eyes with a sad longing 
expression, and, to my astonishment, never appeared to notice my out- 
stretched hand, or respond to my greeting, but quietly passed on. I was 
so taken by surprise as to be unable to speak or move for a few seconds, 
and could never be quite certain whether there was uttered by him any 
audible sound, but a clear impression was left on my mind, ' I have wanted 
to see you so much, and you would not come.' Recovering from my 
astonishment, I turned to look after the retreating figure, but it was gone. 
My first impulse was to go to the station and wire a message ; my next, 
which was acted upon, was to start off immediately to see whether my 
friend was really alive or dead, scarcely doubting that the latter was the 
case.' When I arrived next day I found him living, but in a state of semi- 
consciousness. He had been repeatedly asking for me, his mind apparently 
dwelling on the thought that I would not come to see him. As far as I 
could make out, at the time I saw him on the previous day he was 
apparently sleeping. He told me afterwards that he fancied he saw me, 
but had no clear idea how or where. I have no means of accounting for 
the apparition, which was that of my friend clothed, and not as he must 
have been at the time. 1 My mind was at the moment fully occupied with 
other matters, and I was not thinking of him. 

1 On the view of telepathic hallucinations which has been here advanced, this point 
of course presents no difficulty ; see Chap. xii. 5 and 6. 

VOL. II. F 2 


" I may add that he rallied afterwards, and lived for several months. 
At the time of his death I was far from home, but there was no repetition 
of the mysterious experience. " "W. E. BUTTON." 

In answer to the question whether this was his only experience of a 
hallucination of the senses, Mr. Button replies : 

" I have never had, so far as I can remember, any other experience of 
the nature described in my narrative, and do not think I am a subject for 
such impressions. This makes the solitary experience all the more 
mysterious to me." 

Asked as to his eyesight, he adds : " I am not and never have been 
shortsighted, but just the contrary. Nor do I remember to have made a 
mistake of identity except on one occasion, and that in the case of a 
person I had seen only once." 

[Here the behaviour of the phantasm is very unlike that of a stranger 
who found himself mistaken for someone else. The case is of course 
weakened by Mr. Button's knowledge of his friend's serious illness, which 
makes it more likely than it would otherwise be that the hallucination was 
purely subjective (Vol. I., p. 509). But the fact of his friend's mind 
having been distinctly occupied with him (possibly even telepathically 
clairvoyant of him) is a point on the other side.] 

Mr. Arthur Ireland, of the School House, South Witham, near 
Grantham, wrote to us on January 5, 1884 : 

(296) "About 14 years ago, about 3 o'clock one summer's afternoon, I 
was passing in front of Trinity Church, Upper King Street, Leicester, when 
I saw on the opposite side of the street a very old playmate, whom, having 
left the town to learn some business, I had for some time lost sight of. I 
thought it odd he took no notice of me ; and while following him with my 
eyes, deliberating whether I should accost him or not, I called after him 
by name, and was somewhat surprised at not being able to follow him any 
further, or to say into which house he had gone, for I felt persuaded he 
had gone into one. The next week I was informed of his somewhat 
sudden death at Burton-on-Trent, at about the time I felt certain he was 
passing in front of me. What struck me most at the time was that he 
should take no notice of me, and that he should go along so noiselessly 1 and 
disappear so suddenly, but that it was E. P. I had seen I never for one 
moment doubted. I have always looked upon this as a hallucination, but 
why it should have occurred at that particular time, and to me, I could 
never make out. " ARTHUR IRELAND." 

To inquiries, Mr. Ireland replies : 

(1) "I have never on any other occasion had any hallucination of the 
senses at all. 

(2) " I mentioned the incident of having met E. P. to my mother, and 
remarked on the seeming slight of his not acknowledging me. Of course, 
when the news of his death came, mother remarked that I was mistaken, 

1 This feature recurs in Dr. Leslie's narrative, p. 252. Visual hallucinations, as we 
have seen, often involve further the sounds that a real person would have made ; but the 
absence of this complete development (cf. case 252) is only on a par with the common 
occurrence of hallucinations of voices close at hand, where no visible phantasm appears. 


and although not feeling convinced, I had to assent to such a seemingly 
apparent truism. My mother has since died, or we might have had this 
added testimony. 

(3) " I am thankful to say that my eyesight is good, and I remember 
no instance of mistaking one person for another. Of course I could not 
swear that there was no mistake ; but I do assert that I, without knowing 
he had left the town, and with nothing to make me think of him, was 
suddenly certain that E. P. was coming towards me on the opposite side 
of the street ; that I watched him attentively for any sign of recognition ; 
that I called after him, and could never explain his disappearance, or 
account for the unnatural noiselessness of his movements or the suddenness 
of his appearance. 

" I conclude by assuring you that so far I have been of a very realistic 
turn of mind, and am not aware that I am in the least superstitious or 
even imaginative. That which I have written is the truth, according to 
my experience, placed at your disposal to help, if of any service, in the 
unravelling of that for which at present there seems no adequate 

Mr. Ireland was in doubt as to the exact date. We learn through a 
sister of Mr. E. P.'s and have confirmed her statement by the Register 
that the death occurred on January 9th, 1869. Mr. Ireland was therefore 
mistaken in referring it to the summer. But he is quite certain that he 
" received the information of it within a week after it took place," and 
remarked to his mother on the exactitude of the coincidence. 

[Here the words " without knowing he had left the town " somewhat 
weaken the case. But the mode of appearance and disappearance strongly 
suggests that the figure seen was not a stranger mistaken for E. P. but a 
hallucination ; and if so, there is the strongest probability that it was 

The next case is taken from a book called John Leifchild, D.D., 
his Public Ministry ; founded upon an Autobiography, by J. R. 
Leifchild, his son (published by Jackson, Walford and Hodder, 1863). 
The account is in the words of Dr. Leifchild himself, not of his son. 

(247) " I give an account of an occurrence which soon after befell my 
aunt, for the truth of which, as an event, I can vouch, but of which I can 
offer no solution. She was standing in a little shop fronting the street while 
a customer was being served. On a sudden, her absent son passed in the 
street before her, and, as he passed, gave her a look of recognition, which 
so surprised and overjoyed her that, forgetting everything else, she rushed 
into the street after him. When there, she could not see him, and 
concluded that he was gone to the alley, which led to the abbey, and meant to 
hide himself away. We went, as soon as we could assemble, in search of 
him, but could not discover any trace of the son. My aunt then concluded 
that she had seen his spirit, and fell seriously ill. I noticed the circumr^ 
stances in writing at the time, and pondered over them. 

" A few weeks afterwards my father came to see us, and my aunt truly 
divined his errand. He had received a letter from the captain of the 
ship in which her son was sailing, stating that the unfortunate lad had 
fallen from the mast, and fractured his skull. While lying on his 


death-bed he directed the captain to write to my father, whose address he 
named. The dates of this misfortune and the hallucination corresponded 

[This certainly cannot be proved not to have been a case of mistaken 
identity ; for the " look of recognition " cannot be pressed, that being just 
the sort of detail that might creep in afterwards, and the evidence for it 
being second-hand. At the same time, the sense of reality seems to 
have been of a kind which excluded this hypothesis in the percipient's 
mind : people do not as a rule " fall seriously ill " as a consequence of 
mistaking one person for another in the street.] 

The next case was thus narrated by Mr. Andrew Lang, in an article 
on " Apparitions," Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. II., p. 207. 

(248) " The writer once met, as he believed, a well-known and learned 
member of an English University [Professor Conington], who was really 
dying at a place more than 100 miles distant from that in which he was 
seen. Supposing, for the sake of argument, that the writer did not 
mistake some other individual for the extremely noticeable person whom 
he seemed to see, the coincidence between the subjective impression and 
the death of the learned professor is, to say the least, curious." 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Lang wrote, on January 30th, 1886 : 

" Savile Club. 

" It was when I was living in St. Giles that I saw the real or sham 
J. C. I was under the lamp in Oriel Lane, about 9 at night, in winter, 
and I certainly had a very good view of him. I believe this to have been 
on a Thursday, but it may have been a Friday. I think it was on the 
Saturday that Scott Holland did not come to a breakfast party, and sent 
a note that Conington was dangerously ill. I said, ' He can't have been 
very ill on Thursday (or yesterday, I can't be sure which), for I met him 
near Corpus.' 

" I am constantly failing to recognise people. Conington, however, was 
not easily mistaken, and I know no one in Oxford who was at all like him. 
Whoever he was, he was in cap and gown. u j^ LANG." 

Mr. Lang tells us that he has never had a hallucination on any other 

The notice of the death in the Times shows that it took place on 
Saturday, October 23, 1869 ; but information received from Canon Scott 
Holland, who heard from Professor Conington four times in the course of 
the week, leaves no doubt that he knew himself to be dying on the 
Thursday night. The experience narrated therefore coincided with a 
time of critical illness, though not with the death. 

[This is, no doubt, an experience which might have been without 
difficulty accounted for as a mistake of identity, had the person who seemed 
to be seen been in a normal state at the time. But in any such case the 
coincidence is an inexpugnable fact or factor, the probability of which, as 
the result of accident, cannot reasonably be estimated save in relation to 
numbers of similar and more striking examples; and its force, as I 
pointed out above (pp. 62-3), is by no means entirely dependent on the 
supposition that the experience was a hallucination and not an illusion.] 


The next case is from Mr. T. H. Carr, of 1, The Terrace, Carlton 

Hill, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds. 

"February 18th, 1886. 

(249) " I cannot make you fully understand the case unless you are 
acquainted with the Friends' Meeting House premises. In passing through 
the front gate, the Meeting House is on the left, and my house, the first 
of 5 terrace houses, up a few steps on the right hand ; but they stand 
back a few feet at the end of a high wall. And on account of the height 
of this wall we could only just see the top part of the head and hat of any 
gentleman coming. 

" It was when I was standing- at my front window on Christmas Day, 
1884, that I saw the head of a gentleman walking up the yard which I 
thought was Daniel Pickard coming up, but on getting nearer I saw 
that the hair was whiter than Daniel's ; and on looking again, I thought 
it was the head and hat of Mr. X. But to see him right, I thought he 
would think me rude to be standing close to the window and watching him 
turn the corner, so I walked backwards a couple of paces, expecting to see 
him pass close to the terrace. But, to my surprise, he vanished in a 
moment, and I saw no more. I was struck with the affair, and took out 
my watch, and it was just 4 o'clock. 

" A couple of hours after, B. Geddard, the caretaker, came down the 
yard, and said, ' Hast thou heard that Mr. X. is dead ? ' I said, ' No ; 
when has he died?' He replied, ' To-day at 4 o'clock.' 


We find from a newspaper obituary that Mr. X. died on December 
25th, 1884, after an illness of less than a week. 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Carr adds that for distant objects his eye- 
sight is excellent ; that he has never on any other occasion experienced 
any sort of hallucination of the senses ; and that, though he knew Mr. X. to 
be ill, he had no idea that the illness was serious. 

It was impossible to judge of this case without an actual observation 
on the spot. Mr. Carr's house stands in an enclosure which is divided 
from the street by open railings ; and nobody would be walking along the 
line which the figure appeared to be taking, unless he were coming to the 
small row of houses of which Mr. Carr's is the first in which case his 
whole figure would be visible in a very few seconds after the upper 
part of it came into view. To disappear as it did, the figure would have 
had to retire by the way that it came, but closer to the wall. Mr. Carr 
was perfectly familiar with the aspect of Mr. X., who used frequently to 
come, to see him, and whose head and tall hat were quite sufficient to 
distinguish him from other people known to enter this private enclosure. 
The broad brim of the hat was peculiar ; and Mr. X. also walked with a 
peculiar droop of the head Moreover, the fact that at the first moment Mr. 
Carr took the person he saw for some one else, and then corrected his judg- 
ment, shows at any rate that his recognition of Mr. X. was not that of a 
mere hasty glance. He was extremely startled by the sudden disappear- 
ance of his friend, and at once hurried out to see what could have become 
of him, but no one the least resembling him was in view. The incident 
perplexed and disturbed him at the moment far more than the words " I 
was struck with the affair " might seem to imply. 


The final case of this group (procured for us by the Rev. J. A. 
Macdonald, of Rhyl,) is from Mr. Schofield, of 350, Belgrade Terrace, 
Manchester, a manufacturing chemist, and an office-bearer in the 
Collyhurst Wesleyan Church. 

(250) " About the year 1857, while I was apprenticed at Bacup, I came 
home to Newchurch, in Rossendale, one Wednesday evening. On arriving at 
the gate of the garden fronting my father's house, I saw Martha Mills, a 
young woman with whom we were well acquainted, at the gate as if coming 
from the house. I spoke to her, but she made no answer, and I passed on 
into the house. When I got into the house I remarked to my mother 
that I had met Martha Mills at the gate, and that she did not answer 
me when I spoke to her. My mother [since dead] said, ' You could not 
have seen her, for she is either dead or dying.' I had not heard of her 
illness ; but she died about the same time that I had seen her. 


In answer to inquiries, Mr. Schofield tells us that he has never had 
any other visual hallucination. He adds : 

" It was in the winter, and the light would not be sufficient to enable 
me to distinguish a living person at the distance at which Martha Mills 
appeared to me ; yet I saw her very distinctly, and at the time had no 
doubt that it was she. I was not astonished at the time at the vividness 
with which I had seen her features ; for I did not until afterwards reflect 
upon the distance of the street lamp, and general darkness of the night." 

The Register of Deaths confirms Mr. Schofield's recollection that the 
occurrence fell on a Wednesday, and in the winter, but shows that it is 
rather more remote than he supposed the date of Martha Mills's death 
being December 15, 1852. The coincidence of time between the vision 
and the death was, as far as he can remember, exact. Martha Mills was 
just a neighbour, who would be in and out at the Schofields' without 

Here Mr. Schofield asserts that he saw the face distinctly ; but 
afterwards adds that the .light was insufficient to admit of such 
distinct perception, had the figure been a real person. Now, taken 
together, these statements might seem to tell in favour of the abnormal 
the hallucinatory nature of the vision : l at the same time it would 
be an equally reasonable inference that perhaps he did not really see 
the face as distinctly as he afterwards supposed. When persons whom 

1 See Vol. i., p. 462, note, and Chap, xii., 7. A case of subjective hallucination expe- 
rienced by the Rev. P.H. Newnham further illustrates the point. He distinctly saw in church 
the figure of a parishioner of marked appearance, who, it turned out, had not been there, and 
whose place had not been occupied by anyone else. " When I became convinced it was a 
hallucination, it then occurred to me that the clearness with which I had noted the 
eyes and the careworn look proved it ; for my eyesight is now unable to distinguish 
such details of features at the distance of the pew in question. " It is interesting^ in this 
connection to remark thatMr. Newnham, for the larger part of his life, enjoyed particularly 
good sight ; while another correspondent, who occasionally sees subjective phantoms, 
and who has been short-sighted from birth, says, " I experience the same difficulty 
in discerning the unreal that I do when viewing real objects ; unless the persons come 
near, I cannot clearly distinguish their features." 


one knows are seen in places where it is very natural that they should 
be, one often accepts a very slight and general glance as a sufficient 
ground of recognition ; and it is easy afterwards to mistake the 
inference that one drew from this glance for actual ocular observation. 
But, on the other hand, Mr. Schofield spoke to the figure, and it did 
not answer him ; which would at any rate be unlikely conduct on the 
part of a real person. 

4. The next type that presents itself is different from any that 
has yet been mentioned. We have encountered several cases, which 
there seemed strong grounds for considering telepathic, where 
the phantasmal form was not recognised ; and we have seen that 
on the theory that the telepathic impulse may take place on various 
levels, or even below any level, of consciousness, and maybe projected 
into sensory form by the percipient with various degrees of distinct- 
ness, this lack of recognition is not surprising. But all the visual 
cases so far examined have presented a human appearance : the 
hallucination has been developed at any rate up to that point. It 
will be remembered, however, that there have been instances where the 
human appearances developed out of something of a formless kind, 
which gradually assumed outline and detail (Chap. XII., 3) ; and this 
might naturally lead us to expect that other cases might occur of a 
more rudimentary type hallucinations, as we might say, of arrested 
development, and not suggestive or but faintly suggestive of any 
human likeness. Instances of the undeveloped type are met with 
among the purely subjective hallucinations of the sane ; but they 
are very rare in comparison with the hallucinations which represent a 
definite figure ; l it need not, therefore, surprise us to find that the 
analogous group, which there are grounds for regarding as very pos- 
sibly telepathic, is a small one. Physiologically, we might com- 
pare these undeveloped flashes of hallucination to a motor effect 

1 In my collection of purely subjective hallucinations of the sane, the only visual 
examples that I find of a quite rudimentary type are a star, and two or three appear- 
ances of shapeless cloudy masses ; to which I might add a few of the "collective " cases in 
Chap, xviii., 5. But since this chapter was written, M. M^rillier's paper, above cited, 
has supplied me with a case eminently in point. After describing some most distinct and 
complete hallucinations from which he suffered at one period of his life, he continues : 
" Depuis lors, je n'ai plus eu d'hallucinations tres nettes ; parfois encore je vois des lueurs, 
j'entends des craquements, des bruissements, je sens en moi ce sentiment d'attente anxieuse 
qui precede d'ordinaire 1'apparition d'une hallucination ; mais rien ne parait : 1'hallucina.- 
tion est re\luite avant m6me qu'elle ait eu le temps de se produire." This seems exactly to* 
illustrate " arrested development. " See also case 311 below, where a hallucination of 
light develops into a human form ; a converse case, No. 553, where a developed halluci- 
nation passes into a mere impression of light ; case 332 where it seems probable that what 
appeared to one percipient as a complete and recognised figure appeared to another as a 
formless luminous cloud ; and case 346 where what appeared to one percipient as a com- 
plete figure, which touched him, appeared to another as a misty shadow. 


which, instead of taking the complex form of automatic writing, is 
limited to a single start or twitch. The experiments in Chap. II., 
13, seemed to indicate that the sequel of a telepathic impulse 
might be a single tremor or vibration, sent down to the motor centre 
from the higher tracts of the brain ; just so may we suppose the 
speech-centre to have been stimulated in the case of Mrs. K.'s cry 
(Vol. I., p. 398) ; and in the rudimentary hallucinations the stimula- 
tion of the sensory centre may be conceived as of the same simple and 
explosive sort. 

The following case stands in an intermediate position, as there 
was a suggestion, but not exactly a representation, of human form. 
The account is from a witness whom we believe to have stated the 
facts correctly. She is the wife of an Inspector on the G.N. Railway, 
and resides at 4, Taylor's Cottages, London Road, Nottingham. 

"April 23rd, 1883. 

(251) " We received a letter a few days since, asking me to give you 
the account of our dear little girl's death, which took place on the 17th of 
May, 1879. I beg to state it is as fresh on my mind as if it only 
occurred a few days ago. The morning was very bright, and I think 
the sun shone more bright than I had ever seen it before. The child was 
four years and five months old, and a very fine girl. A few minutes after 
1 1 she came running into the kitchen and said to me, ' Mother, may I 
go and play ? ' I said, ' Yes.' She then went out. Soon after I spoke 
to her, I went and fetched a pail of water from the bedroom. As I was 
walking across the yard, the child came in front of me like a bright 
shadow, 1 , and I stopped quite still and looked at her, and turned my head 
to the right, and saw her pass away. I emptied my water, and was coming 
in. My husband's brother, who was staying with us, called to me, and 
said, ' Fanny have got runned over.' I then came through the house 
and went just across the road, and found her. She was knocked down 
by the horse's feet, and the wheel of a baker's cart had broken the brain 
at the back of her neck. She only breathed a few minutes in my arms. 

" This is just as the sad accident occurred. I have been looking for 
the piece of paper with it in, but I cannot find it. " ANNE E. WEIGHT." 

The accident occurred at Derby. The Derby and Chesterfield Reporter 
gives a full account of it, which completely corresponds with the above. 

[In a conversation with Mr. and Mrs. H. Sidgwick on December 16th, 
1883, Mrs. Wright explained that the apparition was "like a flash of 
lightning in the form of a child's shadow." It could not have been a 
real child ; it was " not the least like one," nor did she recognise in 
it the image of any particular child ; but it gave her a kind of shock 
and made her think, " I wonder where those children are." It lasted 
long enough for her to gaze steadily at it " about half a minute "- 
and "moved away to the right, with her eyes upon it," and so dis- 

1 Cf. Case 491, where a "shadowy light" seems to have developed into more definite 


appeared. Not more than a quarter or three-quarters of a minute 
passed before her brother-in-law called to her. It must have been 5 or 7 
minutes since the child had gone to play, when the accident happened. 
Mrs. Wright afterwards learnt from an eye-witness what the child 
had been doing out in the road for some minutes previously to the 
accident. While holding the dying child in her arms, she said to the 
people standing by, " This is her death-blow. I saw her shadow in the 
yard." She has had no hallucination of vision on any other occasion.] 

It is open to doubt, of course, whether the experience here was of a 
sufficiently marked kind to have remained in the percipient's mind, 
had no accident occurred. But the description of the phantasm 
appears at any rate to point to something more than a mere illusion 
caused by the sunlight ; nor is it of a sort that seems specially likely 
to have been unconsciously invented or exaggerated after the event. 

The next two cases are of a much more rudimentary type. The 
narrator of the first is the Rev. James Went, M.A., of Southlea, 
Knighton, Leicester, Headmaster of the Leicester Grammar School. 

" December 21st, 1885. 

(252) " In the year 1870, 1 held an assistant-mastership in a large gram- 
mar school in the Midland counties. At the beginning of one of the school 
terms a boy had come to the town to reside with his uncle, for the sake of 
attending the school. He was a quiet, thoughtful-looking boy, and he and 
I were, I think, attracted to each other. A short time after he had come 
to the school, he was taken ill during school hours. Seeing that he was in 
pain I suggested that he should go home, and he did so. He was absent 
for perhaps three or four days, and, I think, meantime I made inquiries of 
his cousin, who also attended the school, and got the impression that he 
was not seriously ill. At all events, I had no idea that he was in any 
danger, nor, indeed, as I ascertained afterwards, had his friends. One 
evening I was sitting in my drawing-room reading, my wife being in the 
dining room behind, when I became aware of a vague presence within a few 
feet of me. It assumed no shape, and was nothing more than an indefin- 
able dark appearance as of massed and disordered drapery, though there 
was no rustling. Slight as it was, however, I was quite conscious of it, 
and I can recall it at this distance of time. It made me feel a little 
uncomfortable, and I put down my book and joined my wife in the next 
room. The discomfort passed away at once, and I thought no more of it. 
In the course of an hour, however, I received a note which informed me 
that my pupil had died at about the same time, so far as I could make 
out, that I had been conscious of this appearance. I was, of course, at 
once reminded of it, and took some little trouble to ascertain the time. 
When I received the note informing me of his death I mentioned the 
incident to my wife, and she at the present time remembers my doing so. * 

" I give the narrative for what it is worth. It is very vague, but I 
have endeavoured not to overstate the incident. " JAMES WENT." 

In answer to an inquiry, Mr. Went says : " I have never on any other 
occasion had any hallucination of the senses." 


Mrs. Went writes as follows on Dec. 29, 1885 : 

" I remember well my husband mentioning to me, directly after he 
heard of the boy's death, a queer sensation that he had experienced an 
hour previously that evening, and his belief that he had seen something 
which he could not describe. " FRANCES J. WENT." 

The stage of development here seems just on a par with that out 
of which the appearances in cases 193, 194, and 315 took definite shape. 

The next case is from the late Rev. Stephen H. Saxby, of Mount 
Elton, Clevedon, who was present when the incident occurred. 


(253) "About the year 1841, I was in a room with my father in our 
house in the Isle of Wight, when he exclaimed, 'Good God, what is that?' 
starting up as he spoke, and apparently looking at something. He then 
turned to me and said that he had seen a ball of light pass through the 
room, and added, ' Depend upon it, Nurse Simonds is dead.' This was an 
old servant in London, to whom he had been sending money, in illness. 
In course of post came information that she passed away at the very time 
in question. " S. H. S." 

[The exact date of death cannot be traced, the name being a common one.] 

It is superfluous to remark that such an incident as this would 
deserve no attention if it stood alone ; for therein it only resembles 
almost any example of coincidence that can be adduced. But in the 
case of the rudimentary visual phantasms, the evidential weakness 
extends to the whole class, which is far too small to carry any 
conviction, or to be even worth presenting on its own account ; and 
to many, I am aware, the very mention of it will seem rather to 
weaken than to strengthen my argument. But it is only, I think, 
the vague habit of conceiving death-apparitions as objective presences 
instead of as hallucinations, that makes a " ball of light " appear so 
much more bizarre and improbable a manifestation than the 
semblance of the distant person's form. If the percipient has never 
on any other occasion had an experience of the kind, it seems 
unreasonable to leave the fact of the coincidence out of account, 
merely because the hallucination is of a rare type ; and seeing that 
this small rudimentary class is backed by the far larger and 
more convincing class of recognised phantasms, we may admit the 
presumption thus raised that the smaller group, like the larger, is 
telepathic, while still admitting that the smaller group adds no ap- 
preciable weight of its own to the cumulative proof of telepathy. 
The same remarks apply to the rudimentary auditory cases, some of 
which will be given in the next chapter though to these the con- 
ception of arrested development is less applicable. 


5. The types that next claim notice are peculiar in that they 
involve no coincidence with any ostensibly abnormal condition of the 
agent. Evidence that certain hallucinations are telepathic, and not 
purely subjective, in origin may be afforded by coincidences of a 
different sort. Thus, a person may have a hallucination representing 
a friend in some costume in which he has never seen him or imagined 
him, but which proves to have been actually worn by him at the time. 
Or again, several persons, at different times, may have had a 
hallucination representing the same person, though that person 
was apparently experiencing nothing unusual on any of the occasions 
when his form was thus seen. Clearly it would be difficult to regard 
a repetition of this sort as accidental. It being comparatively a rare 
event for a sane and healthy person to see the form of an absent 
person at all, that two or more sane and healthy persons at different 
times should see the form of the same absent person, is, on the theory 
of chances, so unlikely as to suggest a specific faculty on the absent 
person's part for promulgating telepathic impulses. 

This latter type is important from its bearing on the question 
whether the peculiarity of organisation which conduces to telepathic 
transferences belongs rather to the percipient or to the agent, or (as 
experiment would lead us to suppose) in some measure to both. To 
decide this question we should naturally ask which happens the more 
frequently that the same percipient, or that the same agent, is con- 
cerned in several telepathic incidents. Now of repetitions to the same 
percipient we have several examples ; x but that the same agent should 
figure repeatedly is made unlikely by the very nature of the ordinary 
type of case, which implies (over and above any natural peculiarity of 
organisation) an exceptional crisis indeed, more often than not the 
crisis of death, through which no one can pass more than once. The 
only chance for a dying agent to show a special faculty for originating 
telepathic impressions is by impressing several persons ; and cases 
of simultaneous or collective percipience, which may possibly be so 

1 The evidence for one instance may of course be better than for another or others 
which may have fallen to the experience of the same percipient ; but the following cases 
seem at any rate worth considering in respect of this feature of repetition : Nos. 21, 38, 
56, and 184 ; 41 and 477 ; 44 and 116 ; 53, with the preceding incidents ; 69 ; 73 and 103 ; 
74 and 423 ; 77 and 263 ; 80 and 204 ; 86, 479 and 480 ; 111, 161 and 464 ; 126 and 201 ; 
129, 164 and 551 ; 136 and 137 ; 140 and 642 ; 167 and 315 ; 191 and 280 ; 198 and 274" j. 
279 ; 311, 367 and 693 ; 370 and 665 ; 408, 553, 554 and 650 ; 411 and 463 ; 502 ; 513 ; 514 
and 515 ; 559 and 560 ; the case on p. 355 ; and perhaps Nos. 99, 392, 619, 625, 692. See 
also the account which Thomas Wright, of Birkenshaw (the champion of the Wesleyans 
in the North of England), gives of his aunt's experiences (Autobiography pp. 5-7). Mrs. 
Newnham affords another instance, but with her the agent has always been her husband 
(Vol i., pp. 63-70, and cases 18 and 35). Compare in this respect cases 90 and 700 ; and 
also case 55. 


explicable, will be considered later (in Chap. XVIII.). Meanwhile the 
cases where telepathic impressions seem now and again to be thrown 
off at haphazard, and independently of death or any other crisis, are 
theoretically of at least equal interest. For they tend to confirm what 
experiment would lead us to suppose, that agency as well as 
percipience depends on specific conditions as yet unknown ; and this 
dependence on peculiarity of constitution in two people would go far to 
account for an otherwise puzzling fact the rarity, in comparison with 
the number of deaths and crises that take place, of spontaneous 
telepathic incidents connected with them. 

Of the class of repeated hallucinations representing the same 
person, we have about five presentable records. 1 Most of the inci- 
dents therein described seem to illustrate what may be called purely 
casual agency ; but in a few of them the agent's state was more or 
less abnormal which is so far of course in favour of a telepathic 
explanation of the phenomena. The first account is from Mrs. 
Hawkins, qf Beyton Rectory, Bury St. Edmunds. 

" March 25th, 1885. 

(254) " I send you my cousins' accounts of my apparition. 

" I have also sent you the account of my next appearance, which 
unfortunately cannot now be related by the eye-witness. 

" Again, a third time one of my little sisters reported that she had seen 
me on the stairs, when I was seven miles off but she might so easily have 
been mistaken that I have never put any faith in that appearance. Then 
I was about 20. 

" For many years after that these appearances seem to have entirely 
ceased, but in the autumn of 1877 I was seen in this house by my 
eldest son, then aged 27, who may, I hope, give you his own account 
of it. " LUCY HAWKINS." 

Mrs. Hawkins prefaces her cousins' accounts thus : 

" The event described in the enclosed accounts took place at Cherington, 
near Shipston-on-Stour, in Warwickshire, the residence of my uncle, Mr. 
William Dickins, who was for many years chairman of Quarter Sessions in 

1 1 am excluding from the list a case received from Miss E. D. Jackson, of Strangeways, 
Manchester, where she and her hostess, on separate occasions, saw the figure of a maid- 
servant who was not really present ; partly because the experiences both took place when 
the percipient was in bed in the morning, which we have seen to be a condition favour- 
able to purely subjective hallucinations ; partly because the sight of a person who is daily 
before the eyes is a common form for such hallucinations to take. (See Vol. i., p. 505.) 

None of the hitherto published cases of the repeated appearance of the same person's 
"double" rest on good traceable authority. The case of Mdlle. Sag^e, published in Mr. 
Dale Owen's Footfalls (p. 348), in 1863, was withdrawn in a later edition, as second-hand 
and not well substantiated. Some instances are recorded in connection with witchcraft 
e.g., in Mather's Wonders of the Invisible World (Boston, 1693), pp. 106-112 ; but here 
the idea of the person whose form appeared was present as a permanent source of appre- 
hension in the minds of all the percipients. 


the county. The ladies who saw the appearance are two of his daughters, 
one of them a little older than myself, the other 3 or 4 years younger. 
I was then just 17. 

" The only mistake that I can discover in either of the accounts is that 
Mrs. Malcolm says I had been hiding with her ' brother,' whereas I had 
really been all the time with her sister, Miss Lucy Dickins a fact of no 
importance except that she (Miss D.) might (if necessary) bear witness 
that I had really been with her all the time in the washhouse, and so could 
not have been near where I was seen. 

" I remember we were all somewhat awed by what had happened, 
and that it broke up our game. I myself quite thought it was a 
warning of speedy death ; but as I was not a nervous or excitable girl, 
it did not make me anxious or unhappy, and in course of time the 
impression passed off. 

Writing to Mrs. Hawkins in September, 1884, Miss Dickins said : 

" Georgie [Mrs. Malcolm] is coming here on Friday, and I propose then 
to show her your letters, and Mr. Gurney's, and that we should each 
write our impressions of what we saw independently, and see how far 
they agree, and we will send the result to you. It is all very fresh 
in my memory, and I can at this moment conjure you up in my mind's 
eye, as you appeared under that tree and disappeared in the yard. I even 
recollect distinctly the dress you wore, a sort of brown and white, rather 
large check, such as was in fashion then, and is now, but was in abeyance 
in the intermediate years." 

Shortly afterwards Miss Dickins wrote : 

" Cherington, Shipston-on-Stour. 

"September 29th, 1884. 

" I send the two accounts which Georgie and I wrote about your 
apparition. We wrote them independently, and so I think they are 
wonderfully good evidence, as they tally to almost every particular, except 
the little fact that I thought she joined me in searching the yard 
for you, and she thinks not but that has nothing to do with the main 
fact of the story, our entire belief that we saw you in the body." 

"In the autumn of 1845, we were a large party of young ones staying 
in the house, and on one occasion were playing at a species of hide-and- 
seek, in which we were allowed to move from one hiding-place to another, 
until caught by the opposite side. At the back of the house there was a 
small fold-yard opening on one side into the orchard, on the other into the 
stableyard, and there were other buildings to the left. I came round the 
corner of these buildings, and saw my cousin standing under some trees 
about 20 yards from me, and I distinctly saw her face ; my sister, who at 
the moment appeared on the other side, also saw her and shouted to me to 
give chase. My cousin ran between us in the direction of the fold-yard, 
and when she reached the door we were both close behind her and followed 
instantly, but she had entirely disappeared, though scarcely a second had 
elapsed. We looked at one another in amazement, and searched every 
corner of the yard in vain ; and when found some little time afterwards, 
she assured us that she had never been on that side of the house at all, or 
anywhere near the spot, but had remained hidden in the same place until 
discovered by one of the enemy. " S. F. D." 


" I well remember the incident of your c fetch ' appearing to us. I 
believe I wrote down the details at the time, but do not know what has 
become of that record, so must trust to my memory to recall the circum- 
stances, and do not fear its [not] being faithful though nearly 40 years 
have passed. 

" We were playing our favourite game of Golowain, which consisted in 
dividing into sides at hide-and-seek, the party hiding having the privilege 
of moving on from place to place until they reached the ' Home,' unless 
meanwhile caught by the pursuing party. 

" As I stood towards the end of the game, as a seeker, in the orchard, 
I saw you, who belonged to the opposite party, stealing toward me. As 
your dress was the same as your sister's, and there was the possibility of 
my mistaking you for her, who was on my side, I shouted her name, and 
she answered me from the opposite side of the wood. I then gave chase, 
and you turned, and looked at me laughing, and I saw your face distinctly. 
But at the same instant, Nina, also my friend, but your enemy, appeared 
round some corner, and being still nearer to you than I was, I left the 
glory of your capture to her. She was close upon you as you fled into a 
cow-yard. I was so sure your fate was sealed that I followed more 
slowly, and hearing the bell ring, that, according to the rules of our game, 
recalled us to the ' Home,' I went on there, to find Nina upbraiding you 
for having so mysteriously escaped her in this cow-yard. 

" In astonishment you said you never had been near the place. Of 
course I supported my little sister in her assertion; whilst our brother 
supported you, saying he had been hiding with you. and that, being tired, 
you had both remained hidden in one place until the bell warned you that 
the game was over that place being a washhouse in a distinct part of the 
premises from the cow or fold-yard, into which we believed we had chased 

"G. M. (ne'e Dickins)." 

In answer to inquiries, both Miss Dickins and Mrs. Malcolm say that 
they have never had any other experience of visual hallucination. 

Mrs. Hawkins continues : 

" The second appearance of my ' double ' was in the spring (February 
or March) of 1847, at Leigh Rectory, in Essex, my father, the Rev. Robert 
Eden (now Primus of Scotland), being rector of the parish. 

" The person who saw it was the nurserymaid. I am not quite sure of 
her name ; but if, as I think, she was a certain ' Caroline,' she has been 
dead many years, therefore I can only give you my own very vivid recol- 
lections of her story, told with tears of agitation. 

" But first I should mention that I had the mumps at that time, and 
was going about with my head tied up, and the only other person in the 
house who had it was my little brother, nearly 10 years younger than 
myself, who could not possibly be mistaken for me. 

" On the first floor of Leigh Rectory there is a passage which runs the 
length of the house, terminated at one end by the door of a room that was 
then the nursery. One morning, about 10.30, ' Caroline ' came out of the 
nursery, and, walking along the passage, had to pass a doorway opening on 
to the stairs which led down into the front hall. As she passed, she glanced 
down, and saw me (conspicuous by the white handkerchief round my head, 


and facing her) come out of the drawing-room door and walk across the 
corner of the hall to the library. She proceeded along the passage, and, 
coming to the foot of the attic stairs, met our maid, who said to her, ' Do 
you know where Miss Eden is ? I want to go to her room.' ' Oh yes,' 
answered Caroline, ' I just saw her go into the library. So they came 
together up to my room, which was one of the attics, and found me sitting 
there, where I had been for at least half an hour, writing a letter. After 
a moment's pause of astonishment, they fled, though I called to them to 
come in. When I went downstairs a few minutes afterwards, and reached 
the passage, I saw in the nursery a group of maids, all looking so 
perturbed that, instead of proceeding down the front stairs, I went on to 
the nursery and asked what was the matter. But as no one answered, 
and I saw the nurserymaid was crying, I thought they had been quarrel- 
ling, and went away, quite unconscious that it was on my account they 
were so disturbed. " LUCY HAWKINS." 

The following account is from Mrs. Hawkins' son : 

"June 20th, 1885. 

"In the autumn of 1877, I was living at my father's house, Beyton 
Rectory, Bury St. Edmunds. The household consisted of my father, 
mother, three sisters, and three maid servants. One moonlight night I 
was sleeping in my room, and had been asleep some hours, when I was 
awakened by hearing a noise close to my head, like the chinking of money. 
My waking idea, therefore, was that a man was trying to take my money 
out of my trousers pocket, which lay on a chair close to the head of my 
bed. On opening my eyes, I was astonished to see a woman, and I well 
remember thinking with sorrow that it must be one of our servants who 
was trying to take my money. I mention these two thoughts to show 
that I was not thinking in the slightest degree of my mother. When my 
eyes had become more accustomed to the light, I was more than ever 
surprised to see that it was my mother? dressed in a peculiar silver-grey 
dress, which she had originally got for a fancy ball. She was standing 
with both hands stretched out in front of her as if feeling her way ; and 
in that manner moved slowly away from me, passing in front of the 
dressing-table, which stood in front of the curtained window, through 
which the moon threw a certain amount of light. Of course, my idea all 
this time was that she was walking in her sleep. On getting beyond the 
table she was lost to my sight in the darkness. I then sat up in bed, 
listening ; but hearing nothing, and, on peering through the darkness, saw 
that the door, which was at the foot of my bed, and to get to which she 
would have had to pass in front of the light, was still shut. I then 
jumped out of bed, struck a light, and instead of finding my mother at the 
far end of the room, as I expected, found the room empty. I then for 
the first time supposed that it was an ' appearance,' and greatly dreaded 
that it signified her death. 

"I might add that I had, at that time, quite forgotten that my 
mother had ever appeared to any one before, her last appearance having , 
been about the year 1847, three years before I was born. 


1 This is an excellent instance of delayed recognition ; cf. case 249 above, and Chap, 
xii., 2 and 3. 



In answer to inquiries, Mr. E. Hawkins says : " I can assure you that 
neither before nor since that time have I ever had any experience of 
the sort." 

The second account is from the Rev. T. L. Williams, Vicar of 

Porthleven, near Helston. 

"August 1st, 1884. 

(255) " Some years ago (I cannot give you any date, but you may rely 
on the facts), on one occasion when I was absent from home, my wife awoke 
one morning, and to her surprise and alarm saw my etiJwXov standing by 
the bedside looking at her. In her fright she covered her face with the 
bedclothes, and when she ventured to look again the appearance was gone. 
On another occasion, when I was not absent from home, my wife went 
one evening to week-day evensong, and on getting to the churchyard gate, 
which is about 40 yards or so from the church door, she saw me, as she 
supposed, coming from the church in surplice and stole. I came a little 
way, she says, and turned round the corner of the building, when she lost 
sight of me. The idea suggested to her mind was that I was coming out 
of the church to meet a funeral at the gate. I was at the time in church 
in my place in the choir, where she was much surprised to see me when 
she entered the building. I have often endeavoured to shake my wife's 
belief in the reality of her having seen what she thinks she saw. In the 
former case I have told her, ' You were only half awake and perhaps 
dreaming.' But she always confidently asserts that she was broad awake, 
and is quite certain that she saw me. In the latter case she is equally 

"My daughter also has often told me, and now repeats the story, 
that one day, when living at home before her marriage, she was passing 
my study door which was ajar, and looked in to see if I was there. 
She saw me sitting in my chair, and as she caught sight of me I stretched 
out my arms, and drew my hands across my eyes, a familiar gesture of 
mine, it appears. I was not in the house at the time, but out in the 
village. This happened many years ago, but my wife remembers that my 
daughter mentioned the circumstance to her at the time. 

" Now nothing whatever occurred at or about the times of these 
appearances to give any meaning to them. I was not ill, nor had anything 
unusual happened to me. I cannot pretend to offer any explanation, but 
simply state the facts as told me by persons on whose words I can depend. 

" There is one other thing which I may as well mention. A good 
many years ago there was a very devout young woman living in my parish, 
who used to spend much of her spare time in church in meditation and 
prayer. She used to assert that she frequently saw me standing at the 
altar, when I was certainly not there in the body. At first she was 
alarmed, but after seeing the appearance again and again she ceased to 
feel anything of terror. She is now a Sister of Mercy at Honolulu. 


[The circumstances, and the frequency, of this third percipient's 
experiences decidedly favour the view that they were merely subjective.] 

Mrs. Williams writes : 

"June 20th, 1885. 

"As requested, I write to tell you what I saw on two occasions. I 


am sorry that I am unable to give you the dates, even approximately, as 
many years have passed since I had the experiences referred to. On one 
occasion my husband was absent in Somersetshire, and on waking one 
morning I distinctly saw him standing by my bedside. I was much 
alarmed, and instinctively covered my face with the bedclothes. My 
friends have often ti'ied to persuade me that I was not broad awake, 
but I am quite certain that I was, and that I really saw my husband's 

" The other occasion was on a certain evening I was going to church, 
and on getting to the churchyard gate, which is about 20 yards from the 
door of the church, I saw my husband come out of the church in his 
surplice, walk a little way towards me, and then turn off round the 
church. I thought nothing of it until on entering the church I was 
startled at seeing him in his place in the choir, about to conduct the 
service. It was then broad daylight, and I am quite sure that I saw the 
appearance. Nothing whatever occurred after either of these appearances, 
and, of course, I can in no way account for them. 


In reply to the question whether his wife or daughter had ever 
experienced any other hallucination of the senses, Mr. Williams replies 
confidently in the negative. 

The following account is from Miss Hopkinson, of 37, Woburn 
Place, W.C. It will be seen that in this case and the next, the 
evidence is not first-hand from any of the percipients ; nor are the 
cases strictly covered by the rule (Vol. I., p. 148) which admits to the 
body of this work the evidence of persons to whom the percipient's 
experience has been described before the arrival of news of the agent's 
exceptional condition. 1 But that there was here no such exceptional 
condition does not in any way increase the probability that the 
narrator has imagined that she was informed of experiences of which 
in fact she was not informed. And the news that some one has 
had a waking vision of oneself being calculated to make rather a 
special impression on the mind and memory, the agent in these 
instances is at any rate in a different position from an ordinary 

second-hand witness. 

" February 20th, 1886. 

(256) "In the course of my life I have been accused four times of 
appearing to people ; neither can I account for those supposed visits. " 

Asked to give details, and to obtain corroboration, Miss Hopkinson 
replied : 

" It would be really quite excusable if you did not believe one word- 
of my statements. I can get you no further information to support 
them. In the first instance of my supposed appearance, which happened 

1 Miss Hopkinson's case, however, as regards one incident in it the third is not even 
an apparent exception to the rule, 

VOL. II. 2 


some years ago, the young lady died very shortly afterwards. Her 
parents, too, are also dead. In the second, I gave the gentleman on 
whom I called to understand that he had made a mistake I could not 
ask him about it now. In the third, though the lady only a day or two 
ago repeated to me her original account of my visit to her, she totally 
declined writing it out for me, or letting me use her name, on the idea, 
which I find very common, that these sort of things are irreligious. The 
fourth time rather differed from the others ; but the young lady in that 
case died soon after. I am conscious that in all these cases I was thinking 
intensely of the individuals." 

The following are the fuller details : 

" Case 1 occurred many years ago. A young lady, sleeping in a house 
next door to the one I was in, declared that I visited her during the night 
when she was lying awake, and that I performed some slight service for 
her. She was so positive in her statements that my denial was not be- 
lieved by those around her. I was perfectly certain I had never left my 
room, nor could I have done so without its being known. I will not 
draw on my memory for further particulars ; I might be wrong after so 
long a time. 

" Case 2. Seven years ago. I had gone into the City (a place I 
always avoid) on a small matter of business connected with a relative of 
mine, and I was very anxious he should know nothing about it ; my 
thoughts therefore were occupied by him. I was almost startled from my 
reverie by the clock of Bow Church striking 3. In the evening I saw my 
relative, and the first thing he said was, ' L., where did you go to-day ? I 
saw you come in to my place, but you passed my office and I don't know 
what became of you.' I said, 'At what time were you ridiculous enough 
to think I should call upon you?' 'As the clock struck 3,' he re- 
plied. I turned the subject nor have I ever reverted to it since. This 
gentleman knew my dress and general appearance most intimately. Of 
course, I was not likely to visit him except on business, and by 

" Case 3. About 6 years ago. I was staying in a country town 100 miles 
from London, at a busy, matter-of-fact home, with bright young people. 
One morning I came down to breakfast oppressed with a sensation I 
could not understand nor shake off. It resolved itself towards the after- 
noon in an absorbing thought of a relative in London, and I then wrote 
to ask her what she was doing. But a letter from her crossed mine, to 
ask me the same question. When I next saw her she told me what only 
last week she exactly repeated again : she was sitting quietly working, 
when the door opened, and I walked in, looking as usual ; and though she 
believed I was miles away, she concluded I had come back, and did not 
realise to the contrary till I turned and walked out of the room. 

" Case 4. Four years ago. A young lady asserted I stood at the 
bottom of her bed (she was not well at the time) and told her distinctly to 
get up and dress herself, and that I thought her well enough to do so. 
She obeyed. I told her she was quite mistaken ; I had done nothing of 
the sort. She evidently thought I was denying the fact for some reason. 
I was about 20 minutes' walk from this young lady's room at the time. 


She was perfectly clear in her statement ; and I would not argue the 
point with her; Her illness was not in the least mental. 


The next account is from Mrs. Stone, of Shute Haye, Walditch, 

" 1883. 

(257) " On three occasions, each time by different persons, I have been 
seen when not present in the body. The first instance that I was thus seen 
was by my sister-in-law, who was sitting up with me, the night after the 
birth of my first child. She looked towards the bed where I was sleeping, 
and distinctly saw me and my double ; the first my natural body, the 
second spiritualised and fainter ; several times she shut her eyes, but on 
opening them there was still the same appearance, and the vision only 
faded away after some little time. She thought it a sign of my death. I 
did not hear of it for many months. 

" The second instance was by my niece ; she was staying with us at 
Dorchester. It was rather early on a spring morning ; she opened her 
bedroom door, and saw me ascending the flight of steps opposite her room, 
fully dressed in the mourning black gown, white collar, and cap, which I 
was then wearing for my mother-in-law. She did not speak, but saw me, 
as she thought, go into the nursery. At breakfast she said to her uncle, 
' My aunt was up early this morning, I saw her go into the nursery.' 
' Oh ! no, Jane,' my husband answered, ' she was not very well, and is 
going to have her breakfast before coming down.' 

" The third instance was the most remarkable. We had a small house 
at Weymouth, where we occasionally went for the sea. A Mrs. Samways 
waited on us when there, and took care of the house in our absence ; 
she was a nice quiet woman, thoroughly trustworthy, the aunt of my 
dear old servant Kitty Balston, then living with us at Dorchester. She 
had written to her aunt the day before the vision occurred, telling her of 
the birth of my youngest child, and that I was going on well. The next 
night Mrs. Samways went to a meeting-house, near Clarence Buildings ; 
she was a Baptist. Before leaving, she locked an inner door leading into 
a small courtyard behind the house, and the street-door after her, carrying 
both keys in her pocket. On her return, unlocking the street-door, she 
perceived a light at the end of the passage, and on going nearer saw, as 
she thought, the yard-door open. The light showed the yard and every- 
thing in it, but in the midst she clearly recognised me, in white garments, 
looking very pale and worn. She was terribly frightened, rushed into a 
neighbour's house (Captain Court's), and dropped in the passage. After 
recovering, Captain Court went with her into the house, which was exactly 
as she had left it, and the yard-door securely locked. I was taken very 
faint about the same time, and lingered for many weeks, hovering between 
life and death." 1 

1 Taken in connection with these instances, the following experience of Mrs. Stone's 
own is of considerable interest. (See Vol. i., p. 555, note.) 

" When about 9 or 10 years old I was sent to a school in Dorchester as a day boarder ; 
it was here my first curious experience occurred that I can clearly remember. I was in an 
upper room in the school, standing with some others, in a class opposite our teacher, Miss 
Mary Lock ; suddenly I found myself by her side, and looking towards the class saw 
myself distinctly a slim, pale girl, in a white frock and pinafore. I felt a strong anxiety 


Professor Sidgwick has visited Mrs. Stone, and after thoroughly 
questioning her on her narrative, he writes (September 23rd, 1884) : 
" She certainly understands thoroughly the importance of accuracy. She 
said she had heard of her apparition direct from the seers, in the two first 
cases mentioned. She had never heard of her sister-in-law having had any 
other hallucination before this time (1833) or afterwards, until very 
lately, when she has had an apparition of a dead person. She is old, and 
Mrs. Stone is unwilling to trouble her on the matter. Nor does she think 
that her niece, Jane Studley (who is dead), ever had any other hallucina- 
tion. As regards the third instance, Mrs. Stone only heard it after her 
recovery, from Kitty Balston, whose account as repeated by Mrs. 
Stone was that Mrs. Stone was taken ill in the evening, or rather 
just before the evening, and was quite unconscious at the time when she 
was seen by Mrs. Sam ways." 

[In the last of Mrs. Stone's cases, we should naturally conclude that 
the appearance, if telepathic, was connected with her illness ; but the 
other two appearances seem to have been purely casual. Possibly, how- 
ever, the first may have been due to her sister-in-law's failing to focus the 
two eyes together, which is a common infirmity in some cases of debility ; 
but we should expect a person who suffered in this way to be aware that 
she was in the habit of seeing objects double.] 

The remaining account is from Mr. Gorham Blake, 1 mining 
engineer, now residing at Loudsville, White Co., Georgia, U.S.A., 
and was sent to Professor Barrett in the summer of 1884. Mr. Blake 
begins with an account of long-continued success in alleviating pain 
by hypnotic processes a success which he attributes in great measure 
to abstinence from stimulants, and to the fact that his profession has 
necessitated much active exercise in the open air. He then narrates 
the following cases, in all of which (except the first, where the per- 
cipient's experience was not sensory in character) the agency, if 
such it was, seems to have been purely casual. 

(258) " In 1869, 1 crossed the great Humboldt (40 mile) desert, in the 
State of Nevada, for the sixth time, alone, in the saddle ; by an accident 
my horse, a wild mustang, escaped, leaving me at 10 a.m. on foot in that 
ankle-deep alkali sand, under the blazing July sun, and twenty miles from 
a drop of water, except that in my saddle-bags on my horse. Hours were 
spent in the chase for my horse. Then I tried to shoot him, but he 
escaped, leaving me exhausted, sunstruck, dizzy, and finally helplessly 
dying on the hot shadeless alkali, about noon. I passed the agony of 
death by thirst, heat, and exhaustion, and became insensible. It was rarely 

to get back, as it were, but it seemed a violent and painful effort, almost struggle, when 
accomplished. I was much frightened, but did not mention it till many years after." 

I may mention that Mrs. Stone's daughter has had a similar experience ; so that here 
is perhaps another example of hereditary tendency. 

1 In the case of foreign informants whose personal acquaintance we have been unable 
to make, we have taken pains to assure ourselves as to their character and position . I 
mention this because the absence of testimonials has led some persons to imagine that we 
accept accounts without criticism or inquiry. 


a traveller passed that way in that season, the track marked only by the 
bones of dead animals. A chance traveller came, saw my horse, and found 
me insensible, laid me in the shade of his waggon, and bathed me with 
water and vinegar until I carne back to life. He lassoed my horse, and 
at sundown I mounted and rode to the settlements. Between 2.30 and 3 
o'clock that afternoon one of my sensitive lady friends in Boston, Massa- 
chusetts (2,600 miles distant), while talking with her husband, suddenly 
threw up her hands and said, l Mr. Blake is dead,' and could not be 
reconciled to the contrary. She persuaded her husband to visit my father 
in the same city, and learn where I was, &c. Two years after (in 1871) 
I visited the friends, and was immediately asked, ' Where were you two 
years ago, the last week in July 1 ' On comparing notes, and allowing for 
the difference in time, we concluded that at the time I became insensible 
in the desert my lady friend received the intelligence. I know I thought 
of the lady and her husband while lying on the sand, as we were long dear 

The percipient in this case, Mrs. Copp, and her husband, are dead. 
But I have copied the following extract from a letter (dated Boston, 
Dec. 19, 1885) written to Mr. Gorham Blake by Mrs. Dresser, who 
was one of their most intimate friends. She says : " It is written 
just as I remember Mrs. Copp and the Captain telling us on their side." 
Mrs. Dresser's account begins by describing how the friendship between 
the Copps and Mr. Blake began, through the latter's care of Captain 
Copp in a dangerous illness on board ship. 

" In the year 186 [she is not sure of the date] Mr. B. had not been in 
Massachusetts for years. One day Mrs. C. was talking cheerfully with her 
sister about trifling matters, and, while walking across the room, holding 
a dish with both hands, suddenly the dish and contents were dropped on 
the floor, and at the same instant she exclaimed, ' Oh, dear ! B. is dead ! ' 
Her sister, surprised, said, ' What do you mean 1 ' The answer was, ' I 
don't know.' But again, in the same impulsive way, she cried out, ' Oh, 
he is dead ! ' She could give no reason why she said this, only that she 
was made to do it. This fact impressed her so sadly, and also her 
husband when he was told of it, although it was inexplicable, that they 
agreed to write down the date, so that they could refer to it should occasion 
require. A month afterwards, Captain C. inquired by letter of Mr. B.'s 
brother what news had been received from California, but gave no reasons 
for this inquiry. ' Yes,' was the reply, ' we have just heard from there ; 
and he was in good health.' After this report Captain C. and wife did not 
trouble themselves about the above incident. 

" It so happened that in that same autumn Mr. B. visited 
Massachusetts ; and these friends were among the first seen. After 
a mutual interchange of the news which had occurred, Captain C. 
happened to remember that curious incident, and inquired at once, ' B., 

what were you doing one day last 1 Were you sick at the 

time ?' B. replied, ' No, I was well nothing was the matter with me.' But 
after further inquiry about the time, Mrs. C. consulted the record she had 
made of the exact date when the event happened, and then told him of her 
peculiar experience," whereupon Mr. B. narrated his adventure, of which 
Mrs. Dresser's version agrees with his own description above. 


[It will be seen that the discrepancies between the two accounts are 
very trifling.] 

Mr. Blake continues : 

"In the year 1870 I was in Cambridge, Massachusetts, near Boston, 
and had an occasional correspondence with Miss S., an American, then 
residing in Europe. I received a letter from her, dated Miirzzuschlag, 
August 6th, 1870, in which she says : ' Yesterday I sat alone in my room, 
arranging my herbarium, till I was very tired, but there was such a 
fascination in the work that I did not seem able to break the spell and 
leave it ; but of a sudden someone touched my shoulder with such force 
that I immediately turned. You were as plainly to be seen as if in the 
body, and I said, " Why, Mr. Blake, are you really here ? " and directed by 
you I laid aside my work, and went to the woods. I do not know that 
my mind was upon you at the time. I tried to trace the influence to a 
concentration of thought upon you, but failed to do it. Whether it was 
your letter, your spirit, or my imagination, certainly it was a reality to me.' 
I wrote for more particulars. She answered : ' Vienna, Austria, 23rd 
October, 1870. In explanation of your coming to me, I heard your voice, 
or a voice, speak my name. I turned, and you stood near me. I arose as 
if it were a reality, and as I turned again you were gone ; and yet before 
I did that it seemed many minutes, for I said, "Is it you ? " and you 
replied, " Do you not know me ? " and then you said, " I have come because 
you are tired, for you to go to the woods and rest yourself," and, as I told 
you, I obeyed the summons, and wished that I could have a tangible 
evidence of your companionship.' My diary does not record any dream 
or thought of Miss S. on August 5th, 1870. I was at home, and quiet, 
and under good conditions for such a visit as that described by Miss S. 

"In November, 1883, being in New York, I was in correspondence 
with Mrs. G., who was residing in San Francisco. A letter written by 
her in November, says : ' Last evening, I saw you distinctly standing by 
my side ; you seemed trying to speak, but did not ; you made passes over 
me, and I felt your influence plainly ; you were here several minutes, then 

" In another letter she wrote : ' You came to me yesterday afternoon, 
in Market Street, at the corner of Stockton Street, you crossed the street 
with me. I turned to speak with you, and you were gone. I have seen 
you many times in this way.' 

"While Mrs. G. has been sitting in a room, sewing and conversing, I, 
being in a room 40 feet distant, have willed, or asked, that she come to 
me, and she instantly broke off the conversation, came to my room, 
knocked, and on my asking her to come in she opened the door, entered, 
and seemed a little confused, and said, ' Well, I don't know what I came 
in here for.' I have had many instances of this kind." 

Mr. Blake has forwarded to us the following letter, written to him by 
the Mrs. G. of these last incidents. It will be seen that she is to some 
extent predisposed to hallucination, which of course weakens these items 
of the evidence. 

" San Francisco, Cal. 

" March 22nd, 1885. 

" DEAR SIR, You ask me to narrate the circumstances under which 


I saw you, as I wrote you in November, 1883. At that time I was in my 
room in San Francisco, Cal., and I saw you distinctly standing by my 
side. It was about 1 1 o'clock p.m. You seemed trying to speak, but did 
not. You made passes over me, the influence of which I plainly felt. 
You remained several minutes, then disappeared. 

" Another time you came to me at 12 o'clock, while I was walking on 
Market Street, near the corner of Stockton. You crossed the street with 
me. I turned to speak with you, but you had disappeared. I have seen 
you several times that way, as I have three other persons whom I know to 
be alive and in good health. Yours truly, MARY A. GORDON." 

Mr. Blake continues : 

"On September 28th, 1870, I arrived in New York from Boston 
about 7 o'clock a.m., having with me a valise and umbrella. I went to 
Dr. P.'s house on Fourth Avenue, rang the bell, and Dr. P. came to the 
door, when the following conversation took place : Blake : ' Good morning. 
Can you accommodate me with a room 1 ' Dr. P. : ' Yes, but why didn't 
you come in last evening ? ' B. : ' Because I was in Boston last evening.' 
P. : ' Why you called here last evening ! ' B. : ' That's impossible, for I 
have just arrived on the boat this morning.' P. ; ' I certainly saw you 
here last evening. You asked for a room. I asked you to walk in ; you 
turned and went away. I thought it strange, and that you must 
have misunderstood me. I think my wife saw you too.' Turning to his 
wife : ' Did you see Mr. B. last evening ? ' Mrs. P. : ' Yes, he was stand- 
ing at the door with a valise in one hand and umbrella in the other ; then 
turned and went away. I saw him as I passed through the hall.' 1 B. : 
' It's a mistake, or my double, for you can see by my diary that I was in 
Boston yesterday, and the business I attended to.' 

" I left my baggage in the room and went down town, returning in 
the evening. Dr. P. called me into the parlour, where I met an 
acquaintance, Dr. C. Dr. P. immediately said, ' Another witness on our 
side. Dr. C. saw you down town last evening.' ' Yes,' said Dr. C., ' I 
saw you walking along Broadway. You seemed to be in a hurry, and I 
was in a hurry to catch the ferry-boat ; I bowed to you, and you returned 
it, and hurried on. You had a valise in your right hand and umbrella in 
your left hand, and had on a high silk hat, while I have seen you before in 
a felt hat, low crowned.' We all concluded it was my double, as at about 
the hour they saw me, 6 p.m., I was resting quietly aboard the boat before 
she left, and remembered thinking where I should take a room after 
getting to New York in the morning ; but I did not remember the 
particulars related by Dr. and Mrs. P., or Dr. C. I think I fell into a 
doze, or short sleep, while resting, as has been the case several other times 
when my double has been seen at a distance from where my body was. 


The first-hand testimony of the percipients is of course much needed, 
and I explained to Mr. Gorham Blake the importance of obtaining it.. 
He has made efforts to do so, but cannot ascertain the present addresses 
of the persons concerned. He writes 

1 It will be observed that this hallucination (if such it was, and not a mere case of 
mistaken identity) was collective, as also was the first experience described in case 254. 
The discussion of this feature is reserved for Chap, xviii. 


" I enclose the only two papers on the subject that I can now find ; 
one from Mrs. Gordon [quoted above], and one from Mrs. Gould, that I 
did not before write of. In connection with the latter I will say that I 
called at the Light for Thinkers office, Atlanta, Georgia, and saw Mrs. 
Gould for the first time. She said she had seen my face before, and told 
me as related in enclosed paper. She was not feeling well, and I held her 
hands, and placed mine on her head to impart magnetism, and relieved 
her. I saw her two or three times while in the city, and received the 
enclosed from her after my return home." 

The enclosure is as follows : "April 1885 

" One day, while resting, I happened to glance towards a window, in 
the fifth story, and, just outside, beheld the spirit 1 of my friend, Mr. Blake, 
who seemed unable to get into the room ; but, on rising and throwing up 
the sash, he appeared to come in and stand by my chair, make passes over 
me, magnetising me, and seeming to envelope me with something, just as a 
spider does a fly in its web. Before this, in fact some three or four weeks 
before I had ever met or seen him, while in a passive mood, I saw his 
head clairvoyantly, so distinctly that when he came to my office for the 
first time I recognised him as the person. And although he was at these 
times alive and well, I saw and recognised his presence as distinctly as 
though he had been there in form. Q j] GOULD " 

[The last incident cannot, of course, carry much weight, as the recog- 
nition was a completely retrospective act ; and as regards Mrs. Gould's 
other experience, the fact that Mr. Blake -had been hypnotising her must 
perhaps be regarded as favouring the hypothesis of a purely subjective 
hallucination. At the same time, I am not aware of any sufficient evidence 
that hypnotic treatment induces a liability to hallucinations representing 
the hypnotiser, unless that hallucination has been specially imposed on 
the " subject's mind as any other might be while in the state of trance.] 

Another foreign example is omitted, as we have been unable to 
obtain the testimony of the percipients. It is clear that the fact 
of the telepathic transference in these casual cases cannot be con- 
sidered to be proved ; 2 but the mention of the type here may serve to 
elicit further instances. 

6. Of the other class mentioned, where peculiarities of dress 
or aspect afford the only presumption that a hallucination was more 
than purely subjective i.e., was due to an absent agent who, never- 
theless, was in a perfectly normal state at the time the following 
examples may serve. 3 The first is from Captain A. S. Beaumont, of 
1, Crescent Road, South Norwood Park. 

1 See p. 48, note. 

2 The class, it may be remembered, is the second of the four types of " ambiguous 
cases " defined in Vol. i., p. 505. 

3 As regards the connection of these appearances with the agent's sub-conscious sense 
of his own aspect, I need not repeat the remarks already made (Chap, xii., 8) in respect 
of the far stronger group where there were similar peculiarities plus some exceptional 
condition of the a^ent. 


"February 24th, 1885. 

(259) "About September, 1873, when my father was living at 57, 
Inverness Terrace, 'I was sitting one evening, about 8.30 p.m., in the large 
dining-room. At the table, facing me, with their backs to the door, were 
seated my mother, sister, and a friend, Mrs. W. Suddenly I seemed to see 
my wife bustling in through the door of the back dining-room, which was 
in view from my position. She was in a mauve dress. I got up to meet 
her, though much astonished, as I believed her to be at Tenby. As I 
rose, my mother said, ' Who is that ? ' not (I think) seeing anyone herself, 
but seeing that I did. I exclaimed, ' Why, it's Carry,' and advanced to 
meet her. As I advanced, the figure disappeared. 1 On inquiry, I found 
that my wife was spending that evening at a friend's house, in a mauve 
dress, which I had most certainly never seen. I had never seen her 
dressed in that colour. My wife recollected that at that time she was 
talking with some friends about me, much regretting my absence, as there 
was going to be dancing, and I had promised to play for them. I had 
been unexpectedly detained in London. ALEX S BEAUMONT " 

The following corroboration is from the friend who was present : 

" 11, Grosvenor Street, W. 

"March 5th, 1885. 

" As far as I can recollect, Captain Beaumont was sitting talking, 
when he looked up, and gave a start. His mother asked him what was 
the matter. He replied, ' I saw my wife walk across the end of the 
room, but that is nothing ; she often appears to people ; her servants have 
seen her several times.' The room we were in was a double dining-room, 
one end was lit with gas, and the other, where Mrs. Beaumont appeared, 
was comparatively dark. No one else saw her except her husband. Mrs. 
Beaumont was at the time in Wales, and this happened in Inverness 
Terrace, Bayswater. FLORENCE WHIPHAM." 

Mrs. Beaumont says : 

" I distinctly remember hearing from my husband, either the next 
day or the second day after his experience ; and in his letter he asked, 
' What were you doing at such an hour on such a night 1 ' I was able to 
recall that I was standing in a group of friends, and that we were 
regretting his absence. I was in a mauve dress, which I am confident 
that he could never have seen. 2 Q BEAUMONT " 

* The disappearance of the figure on sudden speech or movement is a feature which 
occurs both in subjective and telepathic phantasms, and there could not well be a clearer 
indication of the hallucinatory character of the latter. In my large collection of 
subjective cases I have only three or four distinct instances, e.g., the first narrative 
in Chap, xii., 2 ; but then it is only in a few cases that the percipient, by speaking or 
distinctly moving, has afforded the condition. The point was one of those observed in 
Dr. Jessopp's well-known case (Athenceum for Jan. 10, 1880). For telepathic examples, 
see cases 26, 159, 163, 178, 192, 196, 201, 214, 241, 540. 

2 A similar case is described by Miss E. M. Churchill, of 9, Eversley Park, Chester, 
who, in October, 1883, when at lunch, had a visual hallucination representing an absent 

" I remember remarking at the time that I thought I saw my sister all in brown, and 
that she had nothing of that colour as far as I knew. A few days afterwards I received 
a letter from another sister, in which she mentioned that my younger sister and she had 


Captain Beaumont adds that he has never had any other 
hallucination of the senses except on the occasion next described. 
This other case, in which the same agent and percipient were 
concerned, and a third case appended to it (in which the sameness of 
agent and difference of percipient recall the repetitions of the 
preceding section), would be quite without evidential value if they 
stood alone ; but they are of interest in connection with the fore- 
going stronger example. 

" February 24th, 1885. 

(260) "In 1871 I was staying at Norton House, Tenby, for the first 
time, and had just gone to bed, and was wide awake. I had the candle 
on my right side, and was reading. At the foot of the bed and to the 
right was a door, which was locked, and, as I learnt afterwards, pasted up 
on the other side. 

" Through this I saw the figure of my future wife (the lady of the 
house) enter, draped in white from head to foot. Oddly enough, I was 
not specially startled. My idea was that some one was ill, and that she 
had come to get something out of the room. I averted my head, and 
when I looked up again the apparition was gone. I suppose that I saw 
it for two or three seconds. ALEX. S. BEAUMONT." 

Mrs. Beaumont says : 

-I "February 24th, 1885. 

"In 1872, two or three months after my marriage, Captain Beaumont 
and I returned from London to Tenby. I went up into my dressing-room 
and gave the keys of my luggage to my servant, Ellen Bassett. I was 
standing before the looking-glass with my back turned to her, and I heard 
her utter a little sharp cry. I turned round, saying, ' What's the matter ? ' 
and saw her with my nightcap in her hand. She said, 'O, nothing, 
nothing,' and I went downstairs. The day after, my husband saw her 
taking off the paper which pasted up the door between my bedroom and 

been getting new winter things, and were dressed in brown from head to foot. I think I 
was quite well at the time, but my sister was ill, which I was not aware of for some weeks 

Miss Churchill has often had slight momentary hallucinations, as of some one at her 
side ; but says that this one was far the most distinct that she has ever experienced. But 
brown is, of course, a common colour, and the case is only worth quoting in connection 
with the one in the text. 

The following is a dream-case of the same type, which has been narrated to Mr. Myers 
by both the persons concerned. The narrator is Mrs. W. 

" Mrs. P., a friend of Mrs. W., was staying in Devonshire, and one night had a 
curious dream about Mrs. W. She dreamt that she (Mrs. P.) came into the drawing- 
room in Mrs. W.'s house at T., and had not been many minutes in the room, before Mrs. 
W. came in in a loose, red dress, looking very ill. Mrs. P. said to her, ' How very ill you 
look ! ' Mrs. W. then answered she had been very unwell, but was then rather better. 
Mrs. P. thought this dream odd, and mentioned it to her friends. About a week after, 
she came on a visit to Mrs. W., and while she was sitting in the drawing-room, mentioned 
the dream, and pointing to a rose-coloured flower, remarked that was the exact shade of 
the dress worn in the dream. After comparing notes as to the date, they found that on 
the day of Mrs. P.'s dream Mrs. W. had been very unwell, and had worn a dressing-gown 
of the exact shade almost all day. The chief peculiarity in this is, that Mrs. P. had 
never seen her friend in any colour, Mrs. W. always wearing black, so if she had thought 
of Mrs. W. naturally it would be in black." 


the dressing-room. He said, ' What are you doing ? ' She said she was 
opening that door. He said, ' Why, the first night that I slept in this 
house, I saw your mistress walk through that door.' (I must explain that 
Captain Beaumont had been a guest in this house on a good many occasions 
before our marriage. On the occasion mentioned, he had imagined that 
perhaps someone was ill in the house, and that I had entered his room to 
get something, thinking him sure to be asleep.) Then the maid told him 
that she had seen me the night before we came home she did not know 
exactly what day we were coming, and had been sleeping in the same bed 
as he had been in when he saw me. She was just going to step into bed, 
when she saw me enter ' through the door,' 1 with a nightcap on, and a 
candle in my hand. She was so terrified that she rushed out of the room 
by the other door, and told the other servants she was sure I was dead. 
They comforted her as well as they could, but she would not return to the 
room. The cause of her crying out, when I heard her do so, was that, in 
unpacking, she recognised the identical nightcap that the apparition had 
worn. The curious point is that the nightcap was one that I had bought 
in London, and had not mentioned to her, and was perfectly unlike any 
that I had ever worn before. It had three frills. I had been accustomed 
to wear nightcaps of coloured muslin without frills. 

" The same servant, some months after the nightcap incident, went 
into the kitchen and said to the other servants, ' We shall have news of 
missus to-day ; I've just seen her standing in the dining-room door ; she 
had on a black velvet bonnet and black cloak.' (We had been in London 
some weeks.) This occurred about 9 o'clock a.m. About 10.30 she 
received a telegram from us to say we should be home that evening ; the 
telegram was sent from Paddington Station as we waited for our train. 
The bonnet and cloak had been bought in town without her knowledge. 

" The maid was with me for years, and was certainly not nervous or 
hysterical. I have now parted with her for some years. 


The next case is from Mrs. Murray Gladstone, of Shedfield Cottage, 

Botley, Hants. 

"January 18th, 1886. 

(261) "I went on Saturday afternoon [last] to see an old man and 
woman named Bedford, who live in a cottage about half a mile from our 
house. Mrs. Bedford was ill in bed, and I went upstairs to see her. I sat 
down by the bedstead, and talked to her for a few minutes. Whilst I was 
there, the thought struck me that the light from the window, which was oppo- 
site the foot of the bed, was too strong for the invalid ; and I determined, 
without saying a word about it to either Mr. or Mrs. Bedford, to give her 
a curtain. This (Monday) afternoon I again went to see the old couple ; 
but this time I only saw Mr. Bedford in the room downstairs. And after 
a few remarks he said, ' My wife has seen you yesterday (Sunday) morn- 
ing ; she turned her head towards the side of the bed and said, " Is thai 
her ? " (I did not speak, as I thought she was dreaming.) " Yes," she went 
on, " it is Mrs. Gladstone, and she is holding up a curtain with both her 
hands " (imitating the posture), " but she says it is not long enough. Then 

1 See Vol. i., p. 432, note. 


she smiled and disappeared." ' When Mr. Bedford had told me the above, 
I exclaimed, ' That is just what I did yesterday morning whilst I was 
dressing. I went to a cupboard in my room, and took out a piece of 
serge, which I thought would answer the purpose, and held it up with 
both hands to see the length, and said to myself, " It is not long enough."' 
I may mention that I had only once before been to visit Mrs. Bedford, 
about a year ago, before I went on Saturday ; and, of course, both times 
wore my walking dress. But when seen by Mrs. Bedford in this vision, 
she particularly noticed that I wore no bonnet, which must have been the 
case, as this occurred before 9 o'clock. AUGUSTA GLADSTONE " 

Mrs. Gladstone adds : 

" Mrs. B. described me as being in white, and I asked her what I had 
on my head. She said, ' A thing like this ' taking hold of a woollen cap 
which I had given her. It was the fac-simile of one which I must have 
had on at the time ; and they were not common, for I had knitted them 
of wool and of a particular shape." 

Mrs. Bedford has had one other hallucination, when she saw the 
figure of a young grandchild standing by her bedside. This, however, 
happened at night, and may have been half a dream. 

When Mrs. Bedford described her experience to the present writer, 
she did not use the word curtain, and she did not recall the remark about 
the stuff not being long enough ; which suggested that these items might 
have crept into the narrative after Mrs. Gladstone's side of the affair had 
been related. Mr. Bedford is, however, positive that they formed part of 
what his wife told him at the time, and before he saw Mrs. Gladstone ; 
and Mrs. Gladstone is equally positive that they were included in his 
account to her, and also that she has herself heard of them from Mrs. 

The next example is from Colonel Bigge, of 2, Morpeth Terrace, 
S.W., who took the account out of a sealed envelope, in my presence, 
for the first time since it was written on the day of the occurrence. 

(262) " An account of a circumstance which occurred to me when 
quartered at Templemore, Co. Tipperary, on 20 February, 1847. 

" This afternoon, about 3 o'clock p.m., I was walking from my quarters 
towards the mess-room to put some letters into the letter-box, when I 
distinctly saw Lieut.-Colonel Reed, 70th Regiment, walking from the 
corner of the range of buildings occupied by the officers towards the mess- 
room door ; and I saw him go into the passage. He was dressed in a 
brown shooting jacket, with grey summer regulation tweed trousers, and 
had a fishing-rod and a landing-net in his hand. Although at the time I 
saw him he was about 15 or 20 yards from me, and although anxious to 
speak to him at the moment, I did not do so, but followed him into the 
passage and turned into the ante-room on the left-hand side, where I 
expected to find him. On opening the door, to my great surprise, he was 
not there ; the only person in the room was Quartermaster Nolan, 70th 
Regiment, and I immediately asked him if he had seen the colonel, and 
he replied he had not ; upon which I said, ' I suppose he has gone 
upstairs,' and I immediately left the room. Thinking he might have gone 


upstairs to one of the officer's rooms, I listened at the bottom of the stairs 
and then went up to the first landing place ; but not hearing anything I 
went downstairs again and tried to open the bedroom door, which is 
opposite to the ante-room, thinking he might have gone there ; but I found 
the door locked, as it usually is in the middle of the day. I was very 
much surprised at not finding the colonel, and I walked into the barrack- 
yard and joined Lieutenant Caulfield, 66th Regiment, who was walking 
there ; and I told the story to him, and particularly described the dress in 
which I had seen the colonel. We walked up and down the barrack-yard 
talking about it for about 10 minutes, when, to my great surprise, never 
having kept my eye from the door leading to the mess-room (there is only 
one outlet from it), I saw the colonel walk into the barracks through the 
gate which is in the opposite direction accompanied by Ensign Willing- 
ton, 70th Regiment, in precisely the same dress in which I had seen him, 
and with a fishing-rod and a landing-net in his hand. Lieutenant Caul- 
field and I immediately walked to them, and we were joined by Lieut. - 
Colonel Goldie, 66th Regiment, and Captain Hartford, and I asked Colonel 
Reed if he had not gone into the mess-room about 10 minutes before. He 
replied that he certainly had not, for that he had been out fishing for 
more than two hours at some ponds about a mile from the barracks, and 
that he had not been near the mess-room at all since the morning. 

" At the time I saw Colonel Reed going into the mess-room, I was not 
aware that he had gone out fishing a very unusual thing to do at this 
time of the year ; neither had I seen him before in the dress I have 
described during that day. I had seen him in uniform in the morning at 
parade, but not afterwards at all until 3 o'clock having been engaged in 
my room writing letters, and upon other business. My eyesight being 
very good, and the colonel's figure and general appearance somewhat 
remarkable, it is morally impossible that I could have mistaken any other 
person in the world for him. That I did see him I shall continue to believe 
until the last day of my existence. 


"Major, 70th Regiment." 

On July 17th, 1885, after Colonel Bigge had described the occurrence, 
but before the account was taken from the envelope and read, he was good 
enough to dictate the following remarks to me : 

" When Colonel R. got off' the car about a couple of hours afterwards, 
Colonel Goldie and other officers said to me, ' Why that's the very dress 
you described.' They had not known where he was or how he was 
engaged. The month, February, was a most unlikely one to be fishing in. 
Colonel Reed was much alarmed when told what I had seen. 

"The quartermaster, sitting at the window, would have been bound to 
see a real figure ; he denied having seen anything. 

" I have never had the slightest hallucination of the senses on any 
other occasion." 

[It will be seen that these recent remarks exhibit two slips of memory* 
It is quite unimportant whether Colonel Reed was seen walking in at the 
gate or getting off a car. But in making the interval between the vision and 
the return two hours instead of ten minutes, the later account unduly 
diminishes the force of the case. If there is any justification at all for the 


provisional hypothesis that the sense of impending arrival is a condition 
favourable for the emission of a telepathic influence, it is of importance 
that, at the time when the phantasmal form was seen, Colonel Reed was 
not busy with his fishing, but was rapidly approaching his destination ; 
for thus the incident, at any rate, gets the benefit of analogy with other 
cases. This illustrates what was said above (Vol. I., p. 131), that where 
memory errs, it is not always in the direction of exaggeration.] 

7. The last case quoted might equally well serve as an example 
of the next and concluding group, the peculiarity of which is that the 
real person whom the phantasm represents is unknown to the per- 
cipient actually approaching. When these " arrival cases " were 
referred to above (Vol. I., p. 517), it was noted that the mere 
sense of returning home cannot be held to constitute an abnormality 
in the least degree parallel to death, or the other recognised condi- 
tions of spontaneous telepathy ; and our first-hand specimens are in 
themselves too few for complete assurance that we have in them a 
genuine type of transfer. At the same time they find a parallel 
in the impression-cases quoted in Vol. I., pp. 252-4 ; and taken in 
connection with the -two preceding groups, they at any rate increase 
the probability that impressions from a normal agent may be 
occasionally capable of acting as the germ of a telepathic phantasm. 

The first example is from Mr. James Carroll, who gave the account 
quoted in Vol. I., p. 281. The agent was the same twin-brother who 
was concerned in that former case. 

"September, 1884. 

(263) " In the autumn of 1877, while at Sholebrook Lodge, Towcester, 
Northamptonshire, one night, at a little after 10 o'clock, I remember I 
was about to move a lamp in my room to a position where I usually sat 
a little while before retiring to bed, when I suddenly saw a vision of my 
brother. It seemed to affect me like a mild shock of electricity. It 
surprised me so that I hesitated to carry out what I had intended, my eyes 
remaining fixed on the apparition of my brother. It gradually disap- 
peared, leaving me wondering what it meant. I am positive no light 
or reflection deceived me. I had not been sleeping or rubbing my eyes. 
I was again in the act of moving my lamp when I heard taps along 
the window. I looked towards it the window was on the ground-floor 
and heard a voice, my brother's, say, ' It's I ; don't be frightened.' I let 
him in ; he remarked, ' How cool you are ; I thought I should have 
frightened you.' 

" The fact was, that the distinct vision of my brother had quite 
prepared me for his call. He found the window by accident, as he had 
never been to the house before ; to use his own words, ' I thought it was 
your window, and that I should find you.' He had unexpectedly left 
London to pay me a visit, and when near the house lost his way, and had 
found his way in the dark to the back of the place." 


In reply to inquiries, Mr. Carroll says : 

"You are quite right in supposing the hallucination of my brother to 
be the only instance in my experience." 

In another letter, Mr. Carroll says : 

" As to the apparition of my brother in Northamptonshire, at a place 
and window where he had never before been, I think I said the room 
was very light indeed, the night very dark. Even had I looked out of the 
window I could not have seen him. With my head turned from the 
window, I distinctly saw his face. I was affected and surprised. It 
seemed like a slight shock of electricity. I had not recovered from the 
effects when the second surprise came, the reality my brother. I did not 
mention the subject to him then, being rather flattered at his astonishment 
at my cool demeanour. The coolness was caused by the apparition first of 
him. The window my brother came to was at the back of the house. He 
found my window out only by accident, or, as he said, he thought it was 
my window." 

[Mr. Carroll is a clear-headed and careful witness. He is quite 
positive as to this being his only experience of a hallucination. In con- 
versation, he stated that there were no mirrors in the room, and that the 
figure was seen not in the direction of the window. He thinks that the 
interval between the hallucination and his brother's appearance was about 
a minute.] 

Here the gradual disappearance, if correctly remembered, is 
interesting as a feature which is occasionally met with in purely 
subjective hallucinations (Chap. XII., 2 and 10). 1 

The next example is a " collective " case, 2 but had better be 
quoted in the present connection. The narrator is the late Rev. W. 
Mountford, of Boston, U.S.A., a minister and author of repute. 

(264) " One day, some 15 years ago, I went from the place of my abode 
to see some friends who resided in the fen districts of Norfolk. They were 
persons whom I knew, not merely well, but intimately. They were two 
brothers who had married two sisters. Their houses were a mile and a 
quarter apart, but standing on the same road, and with only two or three 
other habitations intervening. The road was a straight, bare, open road, like 
what is so often to be seen in the fens, and used chiefly and almost 
exclusively by the occupants of the few farms alongside of it. The house 
at which I was visiting stood about 10 yards from the edge of the road. 
The day was tine and clear a day in March. About 4 o'clock in the 
afternoon I stood at the window, and looking up the road I said, ' Here 
is your brother coming.' My host advanced to the window and said, ' Oh 
yes, here he is ; and see, Robert has got Dobbin out at last.' Dobbin was 
a horse which, on account of some accident, had not been used for some 
weeks. The lady also looked out at the window, and said to me, ' And T 

1 Compare cases 185, 194, 207, 263, 311, 315, 331, 350, 488, 503, 514, 544, 553, 567, 672, 
673 ; also cases 189 and 328, and the account in Vol. L, p. 454, note, where the expression 
" melted away " is used. 

2 Compare the carriage cases described in Chap, xviii., 5. 



am so glad, too, that my sister is with him. They will be delighted to 
find you here.' 

" I recognised distinctly the vehicle in which they rode as being an 
open one, also the lady and the gentleman, and both their dress, and 
their attitudes. 

" Our friends passed at a gentle pace along the front of the window, and 
then turning with the road round the corner of the house, they could not 
longer be seen. After a minute my host went to the door and exclaimed, 
' Why, what can be the matter 1 They have gone on without calling, a 
thing they never did in their lives before. What can be the matter 1 ' 

" Five minutes afterwards, while we were seated by the fireside, the 
parlour door opened, and there entered a lady of about 25 years of age ; 
she was in robust health and in full possession of all her senses, and she 
was possessed, besides, of a strong common-sense. She was pale and 
much excited, and the moment she opened the door she exclaimed, ' Oh, 
aunt, I have had such a fright. Father and mother have passed me on 
the road without speaking. I looked up at them as they passed by, but 
they looked straight on and never stopped nor said a word. A quarter of 
an hour before, when I started to walk here, they were sitting by the fire ; 
and now, what can be the matter 1 They never turned nor spoke, and 
yet I am certain that they must have seen me.' 

" Ten minutes after the arrival of this lady, I, looking through the 
window up the road, said, ' But see, here they are, coming down the road 

" My host said, ' No, that is impossible, because there is no path by 
which they could get on to this road, so as to be coming down it again. 
But sure enough, here they are, and with the same horse ! How in the 
world have they got here 1 ' 

" We all stood at the window, and saw pass before us precisely the 
same appearance which we had seen before lady and gentleman, and 
horse and carriage. My host ran to the door and exclaimed, ' How did 
you get here 1 How did you get on to the road to be coming down here 
again now ? ' 

" ' I get on the road ? What do you mean 1 I have just come straight 
from home.' 

" ' And did you not come down the road and pass the house, less than 
a quarter of an hour ago *? ' 

" ' No,' said the lady and gentleman both. ' This is the first time that 
we have come down the road to-day.' 

" ' Certainly ' we all said, ' you passed these windows less than a 
quarter of an hour ago. And, besides, here is Mary, who was on the road 
and saw you.' 

" ' Nonsense,' was the answer. ' We are straight from home, as you may 
be very sure. For how could you have seen us pass by before, when you 
did see us coming down now 1 ' 

" ' Then you mean to say that really you did not pass by here 10 or 15 
minutes ago ? ' 

" ' Certainly ; for at that time, probably, we were just coming out of 
the yard and starting to come here.' 

" We all of us remained much amazed at this incident. There were 
four of us who had seen this appearance, and seen it under such circum- 


stances as apparently precluded any possibility of our having mistaken 
some casual passengers for our intimate friends. We were quite satisfied 
that we had really not seen our bodily friends pass down the road, that 
first time when we thought that we saw them. As for myself, I was sure 
that it was not they ; and yet hardly could I help feeling that it could 
have been no persons else. 

"There is an old saying about keeping a thing 10 years, and then 
finding a use for it. This curious experience of mine is as vivid in my 
mind as though it were of yesterday. Is it of use as illustrating 
mistakes as to identity, or is it rather a singular instance of what is called 
second-sight ? 


This account was first published in the Spiritual Magazine for August, 
1860. On our writing to Mr. Mountford on the subject he replied : 

" Beacon Street, Boston, U.S.A. 
"8th August, 1884. 

"The narrative of which you have sent me a copy was written by 
myself, as you had rightly supposed. It was carefully prepared, and I 
believe it to be as exactly true as any report ever made by phonograph or 

" At the time when the occurrence happened, I was simply amazed at 
it, and I felt but just simply as some untaught ploughman might have felt 
in the open field, if an aerolite had fallen at his feet, hot from the skies. 

"The persons besides myself, of whom I wrote in that account, were 
all of the family name of Coe, and were all of Islington, near King's Lynn ; 
and they were all living at the time when I wrote about them, but they 
have all been carried away. 

" I have only to add that Mrs. Robert Coe said that she and her 
husband knew of their daughter's having started to see her aunt, but that 
they had had no intention of following her till Mr. Robert Coe, 
suddenly starting from his chair by the fireside, exclaimed ' Let us go to 
Clement's.' " 

[It is much to be regretted that this experience was not recorded in 
writing at the moment, and signed by all the persons concerned. At the 
same time the hypothesis that it was a mere mistake or illusion is strongly 
discountenanced by the persistence of the contrary impression in a sound 
and rationally sceptical mind. For the natural tendency of such a mind 
is undeniably to be less certain of the reality of abnormal facts after a long 
interval than at the time of their occurrence. 1 ] 

It will be convenient to complete the account of this " arrival " 
type by citing at once a couple of auditory cases, which belong 
by rights to the next chapter. The following account is from Mr. 
J. Stevenson, of 28, Prospect Street, Gateshead. 

1 It is interesting, for instance, to find an able observer, M. Marillier, candidly 
admitting that, but for written notes and other indisputable evidence, he could easily 
come to believe that his own very vivid subjective hallucinations of some years ago were a 
disease of memory, and were never really experienced (Revue Philosophique for February, 
1886, p. 206). 

VOL. II. H 2 


"April 20th, 1885. 

(265) "During the months of May and June, 1881, my brother was 
staying with us. He went out one Sunday night between 5 and 6 o'clock. He 
did not say what time he would return, but his time was generally about 
10 p.m. About 7 o'clock, while I was reading by the window, and Mrs. 
Stevenson by the fire, all being quiet, I heard a voice say ' David is 
coming.' I instantly turned to Mrs. S., asking what she said. She said, 
'I have not spoken a word.' I told her that I heard someone say that 
' David is coming.' I then thought I had imagined it, but, lo and behold ! 
in less than 3 minutes, in he comes, quite unexpected. I was surprised, 
but did not mention anything to him about it. The position of the house 
prevented us from seeing him until just about to enter the house. He was 
in good health, as we all were at the time. This is a candid statement of 
the facts. 


In answer to an inquiry, Mr. Stevenson adds : 

" This was the sole experience I have had of the kind. I have never 
experienced any hallucination." 

Mrs. Stevenson corroborates as follows : 

" In reference to my husband's letter of April 20th, I have pleasure in 
testifying to the accuracy of his account, and of his drawing my attention 
to the fact at the time mentioned. 


The remaining auditory specimen (266) is from Mrs. Robinson, 
residing at The Warren, Caversham, Reading, who has never experi- 
enced a hallucination on any other occasion. Some 14 years ago, she 
tells us, she was sitting at needlework in the evening, when she heard 
the voice of her son, Stansford Robinson who was supposed to be 
abroad, but had not been heard of for some time calling, " Nar, 
Nar, Nar," the pet name of an old family nurse. The triple call was 
twice repeated. Mrs. Robinson opened the door, fully expecting to 
find her son in the hall, but no one was there. The son " returned 
unexpectedly next day, very ill, and died soon after." 1 

1 It is perhaps worth while to point out the wide difference between such hallucina- 
tions of voices and one of the alleged phenomena sometimes included under the general 
name of " second-sight " to wit, notice given of the approach of travellers, some time 
before their actual arrival, by a sound of horses' feet outside the house. _ (See, e.g., 
Description of the Isle of Man, by George Waldron, 1744, p. 75.) It is obvious (1) how 
easily an auditory impression of that sort may be a mere illusion just as the swirling of 
leaves is probably accountable for many of the tales of phantom carriages driving up to 
the door ; and (2) how certain it is that, among a population holding such a belief, the 
occasional coincidence, when the suggestive sound was heard and the guest arrived, would 
be noted as a marvel, and the sounds which no arrival followed would find no place in the 
reckoning. It would not occur to a Manx peasant to make capital out of even the 
failures as I have actually seen done by calling them " inverted coincidences " ! 




1. IN examining cages of auditory phantasms which have strikingly 
corresponded with real events, we have two main points to look to. 
First, there is the phantasm regarded merely as a sensory 
phenomenon, on a par with the visual phantasms. This, of course, 
is the sound in itself ; which is occasionally of an inarticulate sort, 
a simple noise ; but which in the large majority of instances repre- 
sents the tone of a human voice the voice, like the visual phantasm, 
being either recognised or unrecognised. But, secondly, when the 
phantasm is a voice, there is a further element, which has as a rule 
no analogue in the visual class namely, what the voice says ; and 
this is likely to afford us some clue as to whether a complete and 
definite idea has been telepathically conveyed from the agent 
or merely an impulse or germ which the percipient has developed in 
his own way. We find that the auditory cases, like the visual, 
present various stages of apparent externalisation j 1 but the discrimina- 
tions here are less marked it being more difficult in the case of 
sounds than of sights to decide, in recalling them, how far the 
impression seemed inward, and how far outward ; while even if the 
special stage be clear in the percipient's mind, it is not easy to find 
words to describe it. 

I will begin with recognised voices ; and will first quote a 
few cases where the analogy to experimental thought-transference 
is strongest, inasmuch as what the percipient heard seems to have 
represented the actual sensation of the agent, 2 the very words which 
he was hearing while he uttered them in one instance, however, so" 
dulled as to be indistinguishable as words. The following account 

1 See the account of some of these stages as exemplified in purely subjective hallucina- 
tions, Vol. i., pp. 480-2. 

2 See Vol. i., p. 536, note. 


is from Mrs. Stone, of Walditch, Bridport, the narrator of case 257, 


"January 29th, 1883. 

(257) " On the 13th of January, 1882, my eldest son, who had been 
paying us a visit, left by a morning train for his home ; but I did not 
know the exact time at which he would reach his destination. In the 
afternoon of that day, my daughter having gone to the neighbouring 
town (Bridport), I was sitting at work by a window of which the upper 
ventilator was open. Suddenly I heard my son's voice distinctly ; I could 
not mistake it ; he was speaking eagerly, and as if bothered ; the voice 
seemed wafted to me by an air current, but I could not distinguish words. 
I was startled, but not very much frightened ; the voice did not seem to 
indicate accident or calamity. I looked at my watch, which pointed to 
three minutes past 3. In perhaps a few seconds, his voice began again, 
but soon became faint, and died away in the distance. When my daughter 
came in, I told her, and mentioned the hour ; she said that was just the 
time my son expected to arrive, if the train was punctual. I also 
mentioned it to my son who is living with me. The next morning I was 
very thankful to get a post-card from my eldest son : ' Arrived all right, 
train very punctual, just three minutes past 3; but to my annoyance, I 
found no carriage waiting for me, or my luggage, only Frank on his 
bicycle. He explained that they had made a mistake by looking at the 
station clock (which was an hour too slow), and had driven away again.' 
I wrote the whole account to my son, but he is rather sceptical on these 
subjects ; he could not but own it was a "strange coincidence, but asked, 
' Why, mother, didn't you hear Frank's voice too ? ' 


Miss Edith Stone has confirmed verbally what is recorded of her in 
the above account. Another son, Mr. Walter Stone, also recollects having 
been told of the incident. 

On February 16th, 1885, Mrs. Stone wrote as follows : 
" A few days since, I came upon my son's letter, written rather more 
than a week after the occurrence. The post-card mentioned was lost, and 
it was by chance this letter turned up. I enclose the first page for what 
it is worth, very trivial save for the impression it made on me. I am 
more than ever convinced of the value of verifying matters of this kind." 

The first page of the son's letter ran as follows : 

"Eton, January 22nd, 1882. 

" DEAREST MOTHER, If you heard my voice it must have been when 
I was waiting for the arrival of the carriage, and expressing loudly my 
surprise at its not having arrived at the station to meet me. I think I 
told you that Frank was there, on his bicycle, and we both jabbered 
considerably. You ought to have heard him too." 

[Mrs. Stone has had no other hallucination of a recognised voice, except 
on one occasion, 20 years ago, soon after a bereavement (see Vol. I., 
pp. 510-2). More than five years ago, she had on several evenings the 
impression of hearing voices in the room below her own. This slight 
predisposition to auditory hallucination would hardly affect the case ; but 
the coincidence is of course rendered less striking by the reflection that 


Mr. Stone may have spoken " eagerly and as if bothered " on a good many 
other occasions.] 

The next case is more complete, inasmuch as the actual word used 
by the agent was distinguished by the percipient. The account is 
from Mr. R. Fryer, of Bath, brother of our valued friend and helper, 
the Rev. A. T. Fryer, of Clerkenwell, who tells us that he " distinctly 
remembers being told of the occurrence within a few weeks of its 
happening." He explains that " Rod " was the name by which his 

brother, the percipient, was called in the family. 

"January, 1883. 

(268) " A strange experience occurred in the autumn of the year 
1879. A brother of mine had been from home for 3 or 4 days, when, one 
afternoon, at half-past 5 (as nearly as possible), I was astonished to hear 
my name called out very distinctly. I so clearly recognised my brother's 
voice that I looked all over the house for him ; but not finding him, and 
indeed knowing that he must be distant some 40 miles, I ended by 
attributing the incident to a fancied delusion, and thought no more about 
the matter. On my brother's arrival home, however, on the sixth day, he 
remarked amongst other things that he had narrowly escaped an ugly 
accident. It appeared that, whilst getting out from a railway carriage, 
he missed his footing, and fell along the platform ; by putting out his 
hands quickly he broke the fall, and only suffered a severe shaking. 
' Curiously enough,' he said, ' when I found myself falling I called out 
your name.' This did riot strike me for a moment, but on my asking him 
during what part of the day this happened, he gave me the time, which I 
found corresponded exactly with the moment I heard myself called." 

In answer to an inquiry, Mr. R. Fryer adds : 

" I do not remember ever having a similar experience to the one 
narrated to you ; nor should I care to, as the sensation, together with the 
suspense as to the why and wherefore of the event, is the reverse of pleasant." 

In conversation, he has explained that he had frequently expostulated 
with his brother on the latter's habit of alighting from trains in motion ; 
and the automatic utterance of his name, on this occasion, might thus be 
accounted for by association. 

The agent's account of the matter is as follows : 

" Newbridge Road, Bath. 

"November 16th, 1885. 

" In the year 1879, I was travelling, and in the course of my journey 
I had to stop at Gloucester. In getting out of the train, I fell, and was 
assisted to rise by one of the railway officials. He asked if I was hurt, 
and asked if I had anyone travelling with me. I replied ' No ' to both 
questions, and inquired why he asked. He replied, ' Because you called 
out " Rod." ' I distinctly recollect making use of the word Rod. 

" On arriving home, a day or two afterwards, I related the circunl- 
stance, and my brother inquired the time and date. He then told me 
he had heard me call at that particular time. He was so sure of its 
being my voice that he made inquiries as to whether I was about or not. 



Curiously similar is the next case, sent to us by Miss Frome, of 
Ewell, Surrey, in the handwriting of the friend, a doctor by profession 
whose experience is narrated. She thoroughly relies on his word, and 
has communicated his name. He himself dislikes the subject, and 
has no belief that such coincidences can be anything but accidental. 

"April 14th, 1884. 

(269) "In February, 1862, an undergraduate of one of our northern 
universities was, and had been for some time, reading hard for the 
approaching examination for the degree which he was desirous of 
acquiring. His brother, an officer in the merchant service, was at sea, 
and at this time in a ship not far from the coast of the East Indies. 

" One evening, about 7 p.m., the former was at work in his own rooms, 
in company with a friend, also studying with the same object, when he 
suddenly heard his Christian name, shortened as was the custom in his own 
family circle, of which there were none (or even of intimate friends) in the 
city he was then inhabiting. He heard himself called sharply and clearly, 
and, astonished rather, looked up from his books and asked his friend if 
he spoke, who answered in the negative, evidently surprised. Again, in 
an instant, he heard the sound again, and turned to his friend, saying, 
' Don't be foolish ; what is it ? ' The reply was, ' I said nothing.' He then 
asked, ' Did you not hear anything 1 My name called ? ' ' No, I heard 
nothing,' was the answer. 

" Almost as these brief words were passing between the two men, he 
of whom this story is related heard again, once, twice, quickly repeated, 
his name, clearly and distinctly, and then he seemed to recognise it as like 
his brother's voice. He could not understand it, and, feeling rather 
mystified and put out, thought he would stop work and rest, so telling his 
friend he would do no more that night, went off to the theatre. On his 
return, sitting over the fire, he thought the matter over, and came to the 
conclusion that, being out of health to some extent, the mental fatigue he 
was going threugh had upset his brain functions a little ; so he put the 
subject from him, simply making a note of the occurrence, and thought no 
more of it. 

" Some months later, about the end of June, he was in London to meet 
his brother, who was returning from sea. On the evening of the arrival 
of the latter, the two brothers were talking together, the younger describing 
his voyage and the various incidents that had happened, and suddenly said, 
' By the way, I was very nearly not coming home any more ; I had a very 
narrow squeak of being drowned. I fell overboard one night somewhere 
about midnight, and I thought I was done for, but after a while I was 
luckily picked up. However, it was a close shave, and I did not expect to see 
you again, old chap, but I thought of you, and sung out and called at you.' 

"The elder brother, recollecting the occurrence to himself in the 
northern city, asked the other when this occurred, and heard in reply that 
it was on the same day on which that which has been stated happened to 
him. He then told his brother his story, and, comparing the two, all 
points agreed except the hours, about 7 o'clock and about midnight 
when the sailor brother quietly pointed out that, allowing for the 
difference of time in the two places, the actual time was probably the same. 


" They talked the matter over, but could make no more of it. Neither 
of them had any belief in supernatural manifestations. Nothing of the 
kind ever happened to them again in after life in any degree. The younger 
brother died at sea a few years ago." 

Here we have once more the feature of repetition after a short 
interval, which seems, by the way, to be decidedly commoner in audi- 
tory hallucinations of the telepathic than of the purely subjective 
class. 1 Another fact to be noticed is that the voice was not heard by 
the percipient's companion this being a point in which the hallucina- 
tory character of telepathic affections of the senses often appears 
(Chap. XII., 10). 2 

In the following case, it is alleged that the actual words heard 
were used by the agent. The narrative is from an English physician 
residing in a foreign town, who wishes his name suppressed, fearing 

professional prejudice. 

" October 22nd, 1883. 

(270) " Years ago there were two girls, half Italian half English, here, 
one with a very fine voice. The poor girl from over-straining got spitting 
of blood. I attended her. One morning she begged me to see her sister, 
who was crying her heart out, as she expressed it, hysterics, &c., &c., 
owing to an absurd dream, she said. I went into her sister's room, and 
found her as described ; she then told me it was not a dream, but that 
she was broad awake, and heard her sister's voice from the garden 
'Georgie, Georgie, I must see you before I die.' By dint of coaxing, 
bullying, reasoning, and exhortation, I got her quieted down, and nothing 
more was thought of it ; but at the time required to hear from England, 
a letter came announcing her sister's death ; and further inquiries 
elicited that it occurred exactly at the time she heard the voice (allow- 
ing for distance), and that the last words she uttered were those heard 
from the garden." 

[In answer to an inquiry, the narrator says that he did not actually 
see the letter which conveyed the intelligence of the sister's death ; the 
exactitude of the coincidence rests therefore on second-hand evidence. He 
was, however, in daily communication with the family.] 

In the next case, the words heard were vividly imagined by the 
agent, and may very probably have been uttered, or half-uttered. 
The account is from Mr. J. Pike, of 122, Stockwell Park Road, S.W. 

"October, 1883. 

(271) "Travelling some years since from Carlisle to Highbury, by the 
night mail train, and, finding myself alone in my compartment, I lay at 
full length on the seat with a view to sleep, having previously requested tho, 

1 Compare cases 154, 266, 278, 285, 287, 341, 342, 508, 674, 676, 679 ; and see Chap, 
xii., 10. 

2 See, e.g., cases 28, 34, 189, 206, 212, 242, 265, 271, 274, 307, 329, 337, 347, 355, 491, 
517, 522, 534, 561, 567, 607, 609, 610, 618, 620, 633, 634/638. Cases 552 (see " Additions and 
Corrections," under heading p. 511), and 685 should perhaps be added. In cases 666 and 
684, the experience was unsnared by one of the persons present. 


guard to wake me at the Camden Town Station. I soon fell into a deep 
sleep, one of those profound slumbers the awakening from which is almost 
painful. Roused suddenly by the guard waking me (somewhat roughly 
and impatiently, because the train was behind its time), I found that I had 
been dreaming (what proved indeed to be the case) that it was morning ; 
that I was at home, in my bedroom, in the act of dressing, and at the 
moment of awakening had been on the landing and twice called the 
servant by her name, ' Sarah,' and asked her to bring me some hot water. 
" On actually arriving at home, I learnt that at the time when I had 
been thus dreaming that I was calling to the servant, she had heard her 
name called by me tuuice, distinctly ; that forgetting for the moment that 
I was not in the house she, hastily discontinuing the breakfast prepara- 
tions, ran upstairs, and afterwards came down again ' as white as a ghost ' 
according to the description given to me by the children who, with 
astonishment, witnessed her proceedings, and not having themselves heard 
the call, naturally wondered what it all meant. Sarah subsequently 
informed me that the ' fright ' she experienced on realising the fact that I 
was not there had made her ' quite ill.' " 

Mr. Pike's daughter gave the following corroboration on Oct. 30, 1883 : 

" I distinctly remember the incident of our servant being frightened by 
hearing my father's voice calling from upstairs, at a time when we knew 
he could not be anywhere near our home. The servant took a poker in 
her hand and went upstairs, thinking there must be some man there who 
had imitated my father's voice. Nothing, however, was discovered to 
explain the mystery until my father's arrival at home, when he told us 
that at the time the call was heard he had been dreaming that he was at 
home and calling for hot water. ^ LMA ]yj PIKE " 

[The genuineness of this case does not, of course, depend on the 
servant's evidence, but on the testimony of Miss Pike that the servant 
mentioned her experience before Mr. Pike's arrival. I have stated above 
(Vol. I., p. 514) that my collection of purely subjective hallucinations 
includes several instances where a servant has seemed to hear her mistress 
calling her a fact which of course goes to weaken the force of the 
described coincidence. But the superior vividness of the impression in the 
present instance seems proved by the emotion and alarm which followed it, 
and which had no sort of parallel in the purely subjective cases referred to.] 

Here, it will be seen, the condition of the agent was not one of 
distress or crisis, but simply that of vivid dream ; and the case is in 
this way exceptional. Affections of a waking percipient by a 
dreaming agent or at any rate cases which could be used as 
evidence for such affections seem a rarer type than that of simul- 
taneous and correspondent dreaming, illustrated in Vol. I., pp., 314-8, 
and in Chap. III. of the Supplement ; but cases 94 and 96 were very 
probably examples of it. In the present instance, it should be 
noted that the part of the dream which apparently affected the 
percipient took place in the very shock of waking ; and such a shock, 


though not critical or exactly painful, clearly involves a far wider and 
more sudden change of psychical condition than often occurs to us 
during waking life. 

In the next case it is very possible that the agent actually used 
the words heard, but proof of this fact is unattainable. If he did not, 
we must suppose some idea of his distress to have been objectified 
by the percipient in the " agonised tone." The account is from Mr. 

Lister Ives, master at the Grammar School, Stockport. 

" 1883. 

(272) "About midday of the 24th July, 1875, 1 was in the baths at 
Llandudno, when I suddenly and distinctly heard my boy's voice calling 
loudly and in an agonised tone. So assured was I of it being his voice, 
that I hastily got out of the bath and looked out of the nearest window, 
thinking he must be on the rocks beneath the bath-house stands on a 
rock, though since then much has been cut away though I believed him 
at the time to be, as indeed he was, at the other side of the Orme's Head, 
three or four miles away. The boy was killed at that very time by a fall 
from the rocks." 

We find from a report of the accident in the Stockport Advertiser that 
the date was the 26th (not the 24th) of July. The boy had joined his 
parents on the 24th, which may perhaps account for the mistake. 

Mrs. Ives says : 

" Until late at night, when the boy did not return, my husband had 
thought no more of the circumstance. When the boy could not be found 
he exclaimed, ' We shall never see him alive again,' for he remembered 
the sound of the voice ; but it was not until some time afterwards that he 
told me that he felt assured he had heard the last cry, not a supernatural 
warning, but a cry for help when none could reach him. I made 
memoranda of all the circumstances connected with the unhappy affair, 
and of that [i.e., the voice] among the rest. With regard to the distance 
which the sound came, I can scarcely give absolute information. The 
headland is of peculiar form ; but according to local maps, if they are to 
be relied upon, if it were possible to take a direct line through the 
mountain from the Crab Rocks, where my boy was found, to the baths 
where Mr. Ives was, it would measure something over 3,000 yards ; round 
by the path, as it then was, about 3 miles ; over the summit, I cannot tell 
how far." 

'Mr. C. Kroll Laporte, of Birkdale, Southport, says : 

" Mr. Ives told me all this [i.e., the incident of the voice] the day after 
the funeral, and I noted it down." 

[Our colleague, Mr. Richard Hodgson, has had an interview with Mr. 
and Mrs. Ives. Mr. Ives has had no other hallucinations. The time of 
the boy's death was estimated only. He was expected back to dinner art 
1 p.m., and it was between 12 and 1 p.m. that Mr. Ives was bathing 
and heard the cry. The words he heard were, ' Papa ! mamma ! ' in an 
agonised tone. The boy was 18 years of age. He appeared to have 
fallen on the rocks face downwards, from a height of about 80 feet. The 


cliff at the spot begins at the summit with a sloping bank of grass, which 
suddenly, however, is followed by an almost sheer precipice, not seen from 
the top of the bank.] 

2. We come now to cases where the name heard was probably 
not actually spoken. The fact that the impression so often takes the 
form of a call of the percipient's name might be connected with the 
fact that this is also the commonest form of purely subjective 
auditory hallucination ; and might be taken as a fresh indication 
parallel to the indications which have been noted in the visual class 
that the telepathic phantasm, as a sensory phenomenon, truly belongs 
to the class of hallucinations. But it is in the very nature of this 
form of communication that it should strongly suggest what in the 
following instance is positively affirmed a certain occupation of the 
agent's thoughts with the percipient. We have often independent 
reason to suppose a similar condition in the visual cases ; but there 
is seldom anything in the visual phantasm of the agent to make it 

The first case is from Mr. G. A. Witt, of Fontenay House, Grove 

Park, Denmark Hill, S.E. 

- "September 26th, 1885. 

(273) "When I left Bombay, on March 1st, 1876, by ss. ' Persia,' for 
Naples, an elder brother of mine was living in Germany, and in very bad 
health, though I did not, at the time, anticipate his early death. When 
in the Red Sea one day, sitting on deck and reading the Saturday Review, 
with other passengers and I think Mrs. Fagan also sitting near me and 
reading, I fancied I heard my brother's voice calling me by my Christian 
name. It seemed so distinctly his voice, and I thought I heard my name 
so clearly called, that it quite startled me, and made such an impression 
on me that I mentioned it to some of my fellow passengers, and at their 
suggestion took note of the hour and day it occurred. 

"On arriving at Naples, some 12 or 14 days later, I found a letter 
there from my mother, bearing the same date as the one I had put down 
in the Red Sea, in which she told me that she was sitting writing by my 
brother's deathbed, &c., adding in a postscript the same day that he had 
just passed away. 

" I never ascertained whether the hour I had put down was the same 
in which my poor brother had died, and now really all I remember is what 
I have just stated. .. Q ^ WITT." 

In answer to inquiries, Mr Witt says : 

" I was, at the time, not at all anxious about my brother ; and the 
' voice ' at the time impressed me as very strange, as I really had not 
thought of him for some time. My brother died in Kiel, Holstein. The 
date was the 13th of March, 1876. This was the date of my brother's 
death; and I remember that that was what caused me to mention the 
matter again to those whom I had told on board the steamer that I 


thought I had heard my brother's voice. I must repeat, however, that 
what I am stating now is from memory only, and the ' note ' I had 
made of the occurrence at the time no longer exists. 

" It is also the only time that, as far as I remember, anything of the 
kind has happened to me." [This is in answer to the question whether 
he had experienced a hallucination of the senses on any other occasion.] 

Mrs. Fagan, of 26, Manchester Square, W., writes to us as follows : 

"August 28th, 1885. 

" On board ship, coming from India, one morning I passed Mr. Witt, 
who was reading on deck. He stopped me and said that a strange thing 
had happened to him, and on my asking what it was, said that he had heard 
his brother's voice calling him, ' Gustave,' more than once (three times, I 
think, but am not sure). He added that he had heard, before leaving 
Bombay, that his brother was very seriously ill, 1 and thinking that perhaps 
he was then dying, or just dead, he made a note of the date. I asked him 
to let me know afterwards if the brother really died about that time, and 
he said he would do so. 

" On meeting him in London afterwards, I inquired if his conjecture had 
proved correct, and he said it had. I do not know whether the time when 
Mr. Witt heard the voice coincided exactly with the brother's death, as 
the difference in the local time made it difficult to decide that point 
without calculation ; and I did not hear that any calculation was made. 
But the two events occurred at about the same time. Mr. Witt offers 
no explanation or opinion on the matter, only saying that it was very 

We have procured, through the Biirgermeister of Kiel, an official 
certificate of the death of Mr. John T. Witt, which shows that it 
occurred on March 13, 1876, at 9.30 p.m. Supposing therefore that Mr. 
G. A. Witt's experience was immediately mentioned by him, and that 
Mrs. Fagan is right in her recollection that this was in the morning, it 
must have preceded the death by a good many hours. If either of these 
suppositions is incorrect, the coincidence may have been closer. 

The next account is from Mrs. Stella, of Chieri, Italy, who was 

the percipient in the visual case, No. 198. 

"December 29th, 1883. 

(274) " On the 22nd of May, 1882, I was sitting in my room working 
with other members of my family, and we were talking of household matters, 
when suddenly I heard the voice of my eldest son calling repeatedly 
' Mamma.' I threw down my work exclaiming, ' There is Nino,' and went 
downstairs, to the astonishment of every one. Now my son was at that 
time in London, and had only left home about a fortnight before, for a two 
months' tour, so naturally we were all surprised to think he had arrived 
so suddenly. On reaching the hall, no one was there, and they all laughed 
at my imagination. But I certainly heard him call, not only once, but 
three or four times, impatiently. I learnt, a few days afterwards, that on 
that day he had been taken ill in London at the house of some friends, and 

1 This of course was true, in a sense ; but, in view of the possible suggestion that the 
hallucination was due to mere anxiety, it is important to notice that Mr. Witt had re- 
garded his brother as a chronic invalid, and expressly affirms that, so far from being 
anxious about him, he had not even thought of him for some time. 


that he had frequently expressed a wish that I should come and nurse him, 
as not speaking English he could not make himself understood." 

Mrs. Stella tells us, on inquiry, that this is her only experience of an 
auditory hallucination. 

The following corroboration is from a lady who was present at the 
time : 

"Breslau, February 18th, 1884. 

" Mrs. Stella asked me to give you an account of an episode which 
occurred in my presence, while on a visit to her two years ago ; and the 
following are the facts as nearly as I can remember them. We were 
sitting working together, when Mrs. Stella said she heard the voice of her 
son, who was absent in England at the time, calling her. This caused us 
some surprise, as he was not expected home, nor had we heard any sounds 
of an arrival. 

" On going downstairs to meet him, we found no one, which astonished 
us, as Mrs. Stella had been so positive that she had heard him call. We 
afterwards heard that on that day he had been taken ill in London. I 
may here remark that young Mr. Stella is very much attached to his 
mamma, and especially dependent upon her in sickness. 


The next case is from Mr. W. T. Bray, of Schekoldin's Paper Mill, 
Vimishma, Government of Kostroma, Russia. 

"June 14th (O.S.), 1885. 

(275) " I was employed as assistant engineer on the Moscow-Kursk 
Railway, and one day was standing in the erecting shop. There were 14 
engines under repair, and 4 tenders, and amidst all the attendant noise 
of such work of fitters and boilermakers, I heard a voice quite close to me 
call twice, ' Will, Will ! ' The voice resembled my father's (he was the 
only person who called me ' Will '), and in a tone he used when he wished 
to particularly draw my attention to anything. When I went home I 
remarked to my wife I was afraid, if ever I heard from poor father again, 
or from any one about him, [there had been a certain breach of inter- 
course,] it would be bad news, for I distinctly heard him call me twice. 
About three weeks afterwards, I had a letter from a sister, stating he had 
died, and when ; and his last words were, ' Good-bye, Will ! good-bye, Will!' 
Upon comparing the date and time, he died about the time I heard the voice." 

Mr. Bray adds, in a letter dated August 21st (O.S.), 1885 : 

" I am sorry I cannot get a few lines likely to confirm my statement 
to you ; the circumstance occurred so long ago. I remember mentioning it 
to my wife at the time, but she cannot distinctly remember it, and I 
mentioned it to no one but her, and then only at the time. I remembered 
the work I was looking after at the time, and upon hearing of my father's 
death I traced the time by the factory books ; and as no one either here or 
in England ever called me ' Will ' but he, I always feel quite satisfied in 
my own mind that I heard his voice, especially as I was told in the letter 
announcing his death his last words were, ' Good-bye, Will ! good-bye, 
Will ! ' " W. THOS. BRAY." * 

In answer to a question whether he had ever had any other auditory 


hallucination, Mr. Bray replies, " Such a thing never occurred to me before, 
neither has anything occurred since." He adds that his father died on 
March 22, 1873 ; and we have confirmed this date by the Register of Deaths. 
We first heard of this case from Mr. Bray's son, who said that he was 
himself told of his father's experience at the time, and that at his suggestion 
a note of the day and hour was made. But his account presents so many 
differences from the first-hand one that his memory on this point cannot 
be relied on. 

The next case is from Mr. D. J. Hutchins, of 173, Severn Road, 

" December 17th, 1883. 

(276) " My father died suddenly, about 48 miles away from where my 
mother resided. I had to acquaint her of the melancholy fact. A railway 
journey, and then a drive of 12 miles would take me to her abode. I 
should arrive about 6 a.m. on a dark November morning. Secretly 
perplexed how I should break the news, I was relieved and surprised to 
see, as I neared the house, smoke issuing from parlour and kitchen 
chimneys. On arriving at the gate, and before time was given me to 
jump out of the trap, mother was at the door and said, ' Daniel, your 
father is dead.' I asked, ' How do you know 1 ' She replied, ' He came 
and called for me last night about 9 o'clock, and then vanished. I have 
not been to bed since.' Sorrow, combined with a strange feeling that 
somehow or other she might have been the means of hastening his death, 
caused her to die suddenly a short time afterwards. She was an intensely 
religious woman, without superstition. I well remember the anger she 
always displayed when she heard that her children had been listeners to 
the usual fireside talk about ghosts and presentiments. 


In answer to inquiries, Mr. Hutchins adds : 

"February 15th, 1886. 

" With reference to the time of the death of my father, it was on the 
21st November, 1855. He was found dead in the fields between Llantris- 
sant Station and Lanclay House, Llantrissant, where he had for many 
years resided as house-steward to Lady Mary Cole. [In conversation Mr. 
Hutchins has explained that his father was last seen alive, walking from 
the station, and apparently in perfect health, about 6 p.m., and that his 
body was found soon after 9 o'clock the same evening.] My mother was 
in our cottage Rose Cottage near Penrice Castle, where we usually 
resided during summer. She was preparing to leave just preparatory to 
closing the place for the winter. My father left her on the morning of the 
day of his death, [having been requested to superintend some work at a 

" At the time when I wrote to you, the circumstances were more vivid 
in my memory than at present ; consequently I cannot actually say whether 
my mother said, 'Your father appeared to me,' in connection with his- 
voice. But this I distinctly remember : my mother said, ' I heard your 
father call me by my name, " Mary, Mary," and then I went to the door ; 
and I have not been in bed since.' " In conversation, however, it appeared 
that Mr. Hutchins is morally certain that the experience was visual as 
well as auditory. 


In a later letter, Mr. Hutchins expressed some doubt as to the year of 
the occurrence ; and we find from the Register of Deaths that the death 
took place on November 21st, 1853, not 1855. 

The next case is from Miss Burrows, residing at Hollard Hall, 
Stretford Road, Manchester. 

" December, 1884. 

(277) " I can furnish you with an instance of my name being called 
by my mother, who was 18 miles off, and dying at the time. I was not 
aware she was ill, nor was I thinking about her at the time, No one here 
knew my name, and it was her voice calling, as I was always addressed at 
home, ' Lizzie.' I can give you more exact information if you require it. 

T , Ti/r- T> *. "E. BURROWS." 

Later, Miss Burrows writes : 

"March 18th, 1885. 

"In regard to the voice which I heard call my name on the 19th 
February, 1882, I recognised it instantly as being that of my mother. It 
was very loud, sharp, and impetuous, as if frightened at something Our 
house is detached, very quiet, and the only inmates of the house beside 
myself were two gentlemen, aged respectively 58 and 37, and a widowed 
daughter-in-law [of the elder gentleman] who had lived with them five 
years ; and not one of them knew my Christian name. I was thunder- 
struck, and ran out of my room to see if I could account for the voice. / 
told the lady the same morning. 

" I never saw anything I thought supernatural, and only once before had 
anything like a similar hallucination. [This other experience took place 
12 years previously, when Miss Burrows and her mother heard some sounds 
which seemed to them unaccountable.] My father and mother were 
not superstitious people, and a healthier family could not possibly be than 

In answer to inquiries, Miss Burrows adds : 

" I heard the voice call my name on the Sunday morning at 8. My 
mother was dying, and quite unconscious, from the Saturday night (the 
night before) until the Monday at 8 a.m., when she died." 

We find from an obituary notice in the Bury Guardian that Mrs. 
Burrows died on Monday, February 20, 1882. 

Mrs. Griffiths, of 31, Rosaville Road, Fulham Road, S.W., confirms as. 

follows : ,, -..- , oK.ii. 

" March 25th. 

" I am very glad to be able to corroborate the statement made by Miss 
Burrows, about hearing herself called by name at the time of her mother's, 
death. I cannot remember the exact date, but it was a Sunday morning 
in February, 1882, and when I came down to breakfast she told me about 
it, and said that a voice called ' Lizzy ' distinctly, and it sounded just like 
her mother's. The next morning she had the news of her mother's 
death ; and she had not any idea that she was ill before, so that it 
could not have been fancy. 


It will be seen that Miss Burrows gives February 19th as the date 
of her experience, and Mrs. Griffiths mentions independently that the day 


was a Sunday in February. The 19th of February, 1882, fell on a 
Sunday. There having been an interval of 24 hours between the 
percipient's experience and the death, the case could not be included 
in the group which I used in the statistical argument above, Chap. 
XIII., 6.1 

We owe the next case to Mrs. Passingham, of Milton, Cambridge. 
The narrator is Mrs. Walsh, a sick-nurse whom Mrs. Passingham 
knew well, and of whom she says : 

(278) " The fact of her having quarrelled with her favourite sister, and 
her dying without a reconciliation, affects her deeply, and she had tears in 
her eyes as she told me the story. She declares she was not asleep, and it 
was not a dream ; she had only just put out the light and had not got into 

Mrs. Walsh writes to us on May 6th, 1884 : 

" 107, Queen's Crescent, Haverstock Hill. 

"On October 24th, 1877, I was in London, and after preparing to 
go to bed, I had just extinguished the light, when I heard the voice of my 
sister, who was then in Wolverhampton, call me by my name, ' Joanna.' 
I instantly answered, ' Yes, Polly/ The voice was low, almost a whisper, 
but perfectly clear, and I was so sure that she spoke that I turned to the 
part of the room from which the voice came. Again I heard the voice, 
and after that, once more, making three times in all. 

" When I realised that it could not possibly be my sister, I felt not 
exactly frightened but awed, and I could not sleep till near morning for 
thinking of it. The next day, I heard from my family that they had had 
a telegram to say that she was dangerously ill, and some one was to go to 
her. Another sister went and found her dead ; and the time of her death 
agreed exactly with the time when I heard the voice. She died very 
suddenly of mortification, and I had not the least idea she was ill ; also, 
we had become estranged from each other, although we were exceedingly 
fond of each other, and I think that is the reason she spoke to me. 


We find from the Register of Deaths that the death took place at 
Wolverhampton on the 23rd October, 1877, and not the 24th. The 24th 
was probably impressed on Mrs. Walsh's memory, as being the day when 
the alarming news reached her. 

In reply to inquiries, Mrs. Walsh adds : 

" In answer to your first question I must tell you that at the time of 
my sister's death I was with almost entire strangers, and therefore do not 
think I mentioned what I had heard to anyone until after I had a letter 
saying she was ill, and almost directly afterwards a telegram saying she 
was dead. To explain clearly, when I had the letter saying she was ill, I 
mentioned it to my sister who brought the letter ; then when I had the- 
telegram to say she was dead, I found that the time corresponded exactly 
with the time I heard her voice. 

" This is the only experience of the kind that I ever had. [This is in 
answer to the question whether she had ever had any other hallucination 
of the senses.] 



" I didn't for one moment doubt whose voice it was, as I immediately 
answered by name." 

3. I may make the transition from the recognised to the un- 
recognised auditory phantasms by an account of several experiences, 
occurring to the same percipient, in one of which the voice was 
recognised, but not in the others. The witness is Mrs. Wight, of 
12, Sinclair Road, West Kensington. 

(279) " On five occasions in my life I have heard my Christian name 
uttered in a peremptory manner, as if by some one who was in need of my 
aid ; and after each occasion I have learnt that a relation had died at a 
time closely corresponding to the call. I have never on any other occasion 
had any sort of hallucination of the senses whatever. 

" The first two occasions of my hearing the call corresponded with the 
deaths of two aunts, who had brought me up in my childhood, when my 
parents were in India. In these cases I cannot say whether the call was 
on the very day of the death or not ; it was certainly within a very few 

" The next and most striking occasion was at the time of the death of 
my mother, which took place in India, on November 8th, 1 864. I was 
living at the time with a cousin, Mrs. Harnett, and her husband, at St. 
John's Wood. I was sitting one morning in a room with Mr. Harnett, 
when we both distinctly heard a voice utter my name as it seemed from 
outside the room. I at once went to look, but it proved that no inmate 
of the house had called me. Indeed, there was no one except my cousin 
who would have used my Christian name ; and all our search and efforts 
to solve the mystery were unavailing. As Mr. Harnett had heard of the 
similar occurrence on the death of my aunts, he made a note in writing of 
the date. In about three weeks, we received the news of my mother's 
death in India, after a week's illness ; and I had Mr. Harriett's assurance, 
as well as my own memory, that the date of death corresponded with the 
day of the call. 

" The next occasion was at Brighton ; and this was the only time when 
the voice was recognised. As I awoke in the morning, I heard the voice 
of Admiral Wight, my father-in-law, who had died before my mother, 
calling me as he frequently had done in life. In a day or so, his widow 
wrote and told me of the death of his son, my husband's half-brother. I 
had known that he was very ill, but was not in immediate anxiety about 

" The fifth occasion was in June, 1876, and was immediately followed 
by the news of the death of an infant niece, aged 9 months, whom also I 
had known to be ailing. In these last two cases, again, I cannot be sure 
whether the days of the call and of the death corresponded ; if not, they 
most certainly very nearly did. g AKAH WIGHT." 

[The above account was written out by me, January 31st, 1884, imme- 
diately after a long interview with Mrs. Wight, in which every detail was 
gone over again and again. I sent the account to Mrs. Wight, who made 
a few trifling additions, and signed it.] 


Mrs. Wight adds : " Mrs. Harriett is in delicate health, and I should 
not like to trouble her. When I spoke to her about it, she remembered 
the incident." 

The strength of this narrative, of course, lies in the third case, 
where the correspondence of day was made out to be exact. The 
hypothesis that the call on this occasion was a real call outside the 
house, though repudiated by Mrs. Wight, cannot be so confidently 
rejected by those who realise the difficulty of localising sounds with 
precision. Still, the fact of her having on other occasions experienced 
impressions of exactly this .form the commonest of all forms of 
sensory hallucination distinctly supports the view that the experi- 
ence was hallucinatory ; and if so, the coincidence of day is a strong 
point in favour of the telepathic explanation. I will not pause here 
on the fact that in this instance there was a second percipient, as 
that topic will be fully discussed in the chapter, on " Collective 

The next account is from Mr. Goodyear, now of Avoca Villa, Park 
Road, Bevois Hill, Southampton, who refers in it to a visual case 

quoted in Chap. XII., 3. 

"February 9th, 1884. 

(280) " I am very fond of shooting, and one evening I had gone out 
with my bag and gun. I was crossing some open meadows, when suddenly 
a fearfully shrill cry of ' Tom ' rang in my ears. I instantly answered 
loudly, ' Yes, yes,' turning sharply round to see who was in pain, but there 
was no one near, and again the scream rang out terribly loud. I answered 
again, ' Yes, yes,' and then I heard no more. I retraced my steps, for I 
was quite unstrung ; but later on, when it was dark, I went over to see 
the keeper in whose woods I was going to shoot, and told him what had 
happened. He said, ' Bad news,' and he was right ; for next morning 
summoned me to join my bereaved sweetheart, who at that very time, 
certainly to within a very few minutes, lost her father. I knew her father 
was ill, had been for some 18 months, but was not thinking about them 
at the time. I do not know whether these cases are particularly striking, 
or whether there are heaps of similar ones, but they are just what 
happened, and will for ever live fresh in my memory. 


We find from the Register of Deaths that the death took place on 
March 7, 1876, after a 2 years' illness. 

Asked if this is the only auditory hallucination that he can recall, 
Mr. Goodyear replies in the affirmative. 

Asked whether the lady really uttered his name at the time, he 
replies, " My wife does not think she uttered my name aloud, though for 
several reasons she was thinking intensely of me." He has told me in 
confidence special circumstances which caused the mind of the dying man 

VOL. II. I 2 


to be much occupied with him, and which caused the mind of his fiancee 
to be directed towards him with a special longing for his presence. 

The following account was received in October, 1884, from Mrs. 
Wilkie, who prefers that her address should not be published. 

(281) " In September, 1875, I was in Callander, in lodgings with my 
sister and other friends. On the night of the 8th I had gone to bed, but 
had only lately put out the light, and was quite wide awake ; when I heard 
from apparently just behind the curtain, at the side of the bed, the words 
'Oh! Eliza,' (my name) in a mournful tone. I was so much impressed by 
the occurrence that I noted down the date next morning, and told my 
sister of what I had heard. As time passed on, and I heard from all my 
own people and heard of nothing having happened to any of them, I quite 
forgot the circumstance. 

" Several months after, I heard of the death by drowning, in the Fiji 
Islands, of a gentleman, a distant cousin of mine, whom I had known very 
well. His relations did not know on which day his death took place, 
but it was between the 7th and 9th of September, as they got a letter 
from him begun on the 7th, and his partner, who was away from the 
place, came home on the 9th, and found him drowned. He had gone out 
bathing, it was supposed, and taken cramp. 

"E. K. WILKIE." 

We find a notice in the Edinburgh Gourant which states that the 
death occurred "early in September, 1875." 

In answer to the question whether this was the only hallucination of 
the senses that she has ever had, Mrs. Wilkie replies, "Yes, the only one." 
She believes that the diary in which her experience was at once noted 
may still be in existence, but has searched for it in vain. Should she 
ever find it, she has promised to show me the entry. 

Mrs. Wilkie's sister, Mrs. Rowe, writes to us on December 1, 1884 : 

"South Ste. Marie, Mich., U.S.A. 

"In the year 1875, the month of September, I was staying at Callander 
with my sister, Mrs. Wilkie. I remember her telling me one morning of 
having heard her name spoken the night before, from behind the curtain 
at the head of her bed, these words : ' Oh ! Eliza ' ; and this occurred 
before she heard of the death of her friend. . . j) ORA H ROWE " 

The narrator of the next case is Mrs. Wyld, of 59, Devonshire Road, 


"May 10th, 1885. 

(282) " I would very gladly write the short statement you ask for, 
but though to my own mind it is pretty cone usive, still I feel that to 
outsiders it is wanting in two important details : (1) I mentioned the 
fact of hearing the voice to no one at the time [but see below], and (2) 
I could not tell whose voice it was. 

" It was on Thursday evening, January 10th, 1884, that I was sitting 
alone in the house reading, and it seemed strange, and still not strange, to 
hear my name called with a sort of eager entreaty. 


"Shortly after, the others came in. I was leaving for Ellesmere next 
day, and in the bustle of departure I thought no more of the circum- 
stance. It was only when coming down to breakfast on the Saturday 
morning and finding the letter telling of E.'s death, that I instantly 
recalled the circumstances, and saw that the time and day corresponded 
with when they knew she must have slipped out, and down to the river. 

" I wonder I did not associate it with her, for she had written me 
some very pitiable letters beforehand. I had not the least idea her mind 
was affected. We were school-fellows together for nearly three years and 
great friends. " MARY WYLD." 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Wyld adds : 

" I never have had a hallucination of the senses at any other time. 
It was about 8 o'clock in the evening, I fancy, when I heard the voice. 
She was not found till 2 o'clock the next morning when the tide turned on 
the river ; she then had been dead several hours, having slipped out, I 
fancy, between 7 and 9 the previous evening." 

We have verified the date given, and the circumstances of the death, 
in two local newspapers. It appears that though the body was not 
recovered till early next morning, it was seen, and the shawl that was 
round it was even seized and drawn into a boat, at 10 p.m. 

Mrs. Wyld afterwards found that she had mentioned her experience 
at the time to her mother, who writes to us on March 19, 1886 : 

" Mrs. Wyld was staying with me in Scarborough, when she heard the 
voice in which you are interested. She was alone in the house (excepting 
servants), and when I returned, an hour after, she related what had seemed 
to her peculiar. The date I do not now remember ; but Mrs. Wyld left 
Scarborough the next day ; and in two or three days after, she wrote to 
tell me of the sad event having taken place that evening. 


[The non-recognition here rather tends to strengthen the case, by 
increasing the improbability that the hallucination was due to anxiety 
about the absent friend.] 

The following case is from Miss Harriss, of 25, Shepherd's Bush 

Road, W. 

"January 25th, 1884. 

(283) " Exactly the hour in the afternoon that my mother died, being 
out for a long walk in the country with a companion, and having parted 
from her to pick wild flowers, I heard myself distinctly called several times. 
With a feeling as if some ill were approaching, I looked at my watch 
instinctively, and found it half-past 4. I cannot tell why I did so, for I 
was then only a school-girl, and calling to my companion I found she had 
not addressed me. I dreamed of my mother's death the same night. 


In answer to inquiries, Miss Harriss adds : 

"My mother died on 25th September, 1875. She was in better health 
than I had seen her for years when I left her about six weeks before, which 
was the reason of my doing so. She died suddenly of heart disease. I 
had heard from her only two days before, in good health and spirits. The 


hour of death was stated in the letter and telegram ; I think I have both 

" I never had another auditory hallucination. I never had another 
dream of death besides that about my mother ; it was very vivid and 
distressing. I saw her dying." 

The following is an extract, copied by the present writer, from a letter 
written to Miss Harriss by her father, and dated September 25, 1875 ; 

" Ashfield. 

" MY DEAR ANNIE, You will be much surprised that your deaf 
mamma passed away this afternoon about 3.45, so gently that we could 
not believe that she was really gone. . . I think she was not quite 
conscious at the time. Your affectionate father, " J. H. HARRISS." 

The friend who was with Miss Harriss at the time writes to us on 
July 12, 1884, from 58, Cornwall Gardens, S.W. : 

" The following is an answer to your inquiries regarding my recollection 
of a certain incident relating to the death of Miss Harriss' mother. I 
remember her coming down one morning much disturbed at a very vivid 
dream she had during the night, in which she saw her mother lying dead. 
About an hour after she told us, the post came in, bringing Miss Harriss 
the news of her mother's death. The previous day Miss Harriss had been 
in the woods with me, and came and asked me why I called her, and what 
was the matter. On finding I had not, she told me she had been quite sure 
some one was calling her, and wanted her. I believe afterwards we were 
struck at the curious coincidence of her mother being taken ill that after- 
noon, and being actually dead about the time of her dream. 


[In conversation, Miss Harriss assured me again that she is positive 
that the hour at which she heard the voice was the hour of her mother's 
death. If her recollection of the time which she noted by her watch is 
correct, this is an instance of exaggeration of correctness, as there was 
an interval of three-quarters of an hour.] 

Here we can hardly attribute the dream to any excitement caused 
by the previous hallucination, since that does not appear to have 
suggested her mother to Miss Harriss. If we regard both incidents 
as telepathic, and as due to a common cause, the case would be an 
interesting instance of " deferred impression " the dim impulse 
which immediately after the death emerged as an unrecognised 
phantasm, developing into more definitely " veridical " shape in sleep. 

4. And now we come to cases where the auditory impression 
was of a complete sentence, conveying either a piece of information 
or a direction. The following account is from the Rev. R. H. Killick, 
of Great Smeaton Rectory, Northallerton, and is quoted from an 
undated letter to the Rev. R. H. Davies, of Chelsea, who tells me, on 
November 25th, 1885, that it must have been received "ten or 


twelve years ago." Mr. Killick sent us on April 23rd, 1884, an 
almost precisely similar account. We have not been able to obtain 
direct confirmation from his wife, who is an invalid ; but he tells us 
that her memory confirms his own. The incident happened, however, 
rather more than 30 years ago. 

(284) " A very much loved little daughter (now married) was with my 
family at our vicarage in Wiltshire, and I was in Paris. One Sunday after- 
noon, I was sitting in the courtyard of our hotel, taking coffee, when a 
sudden thought shot into my mind, ' Etta has fallen into the water.' [In 
the later account the parallel clause is " when all at once I seemed to 
hear a voice say, ' Etta has fallen into the pond."'] I should tell you that 
we had large grounds, and a fine piece of artificial water, with a grass walk 
all round, and a waterfall and cave, &c. a favourite part. [In the later 
account, Mr. Killick adds that this pond " was my horror for the children. 
They were never allowed to go near it, except with one of the family."] 
I tried to banish the thought, but in vain. I went out into the city and 
walked for hours, trying to obliterate the impression in every possible 
way, but in vain. I walked till I was too tired to walk any longer, 
and returned and went to bed, but not to sleep. I went next day to 
the Post-office, hoping for letters; but there were none. I could not 
stay in Paris, so I went to the Ambassador's and got a passport for 

" In the course of time I had letters saying all were well ; and I 
finished my journey, and never spoke of my ' foolish nervousness ' as I 
admitted it to be. 

" Some months afterwards I was at a dinner party, and the hostess 
said, ' What did you say about Etta, when you heard T 

" ' Heard what 1 ' I said. 

" ' Oh ! ' said the lady, ' have I let out a secret 1 ' 

" I said, ' I don't leave till I learn ! ' 

" She said, ' Don't get me into trouble, but I mean about her falling 
into the pond.' 

" ' What pond ? ' 

" < Your pond.' 

" ' When 1 ' 

" ' While you were abroad.' 

" I was about leaving, so I said very little more, but hastened home. 
I sought our governess, and inquired what it all meant. 

" She said, ' Oh, how cruel to tell you, now it's all over ! Well, one 
Sunday afternoon we were walking by the pond, and Theodore said, 
" Etta, it's so funny to walk with your eyes shut " ; so she tried, and 
fell into the water. I heard a scream, and looked round and saw 
Etta's head come up, and I ran and seized her and pulled her out. 
Oh, it was so dreadful ! And then I carried her up to her mamma, and 
she was put to bed, and soon got all right.' 

" 1 inquired the day ; it was the very Sunday that I was in Paris, and 
had this dreadful conviction. 

" I asked the hour. About 4 o'clock ! The very time, also, that the 
unwelcome thought plunged into my mind. 


" I said, ' Then it was revealed to me in Paris the instant it happened ' ; 
and, for the first time, I told her of my sad experience in Paris on that 
Sunday afternoon. " R. HENRY KILLICK." 

Mr. Killick writes us on May 6th, 1884 : 

" As to your queries : you ask was the impression unique in my expe- 
rience. I think it was. I cannot remember anything like it. You ask, 
was the pond a source of danger, &c. The children were never allowed to 
go near it without grown-up people being with them ; it was prohibited ; 
and it was quite away from their part of the grounds. We were so strict 
and careful that the accident seemed an impossibility. We had never had 
any alarm on the subject. 

" At that time I had ten children at home ; and yet it was the special 
one that had the accident who was present to my mind at that moment. 
The voice seemed to say, ' Etta has fallen into the pond.' " 

The two expressions " A sudden thought shot into my mind," and 
" I seemed to hear a voice say," are perfectly compatible, as expressing 
a hallucination only slightly externalised (Vol. I, pp. 480-1) ; but such 
descriptions might, no doubt, apply equally to something too inward 
to be called hallucination at all ; and in fact a parallel but less 
distinct case (No. 80) has been classed among emotional and not 
sensory impressions. In other respects, the present narrative reminds 
us of Mr. Jukes's case (Vol. I., p. 407), and of Mr. Everitt's case 
(Vol. I., p. 409). The sense of a third personality a messenger 
implied in the form of the message, may be interpreted as the 
subjective contribution of the percipient; who projects his impression 
in the fashion in which it would most naturally strike his senses, if it 
really came to him in a normal way from without. 

A still more remarkable case has been supplied to us by Dr. 
Nicolas, Count Gone'mys, of Corfu, a member of our Society, from 
whose long paper, which was in French, the following account is 
abstracted. The first person is retained for the sake of clearness. 

"February, 1885. 

(285) " In the year 1869, I was Officer of Health in the Hellenic army. 
By command of the War Office, I was attached to the garrison of the 
Island of Zante. As I was approaching the island in a steamboat, to 
take up my new position, and at about two hours' distance from the 
shore, I heard a sudden inward voice say to me, over and over again, in 
Italian, ' Go to Volterra.' I was made almost dizzy by the frequency 
with which this phrase was repeated. Although in perfectly good health 
at the time, I became seriously alarmed at what I considered as an 
auditory hallucination. I had no association with the name of M. 
Volterra, a gentleman of Zante with whom I was not even acquainted, 
although I had once seen him, 10 years before. I tried the effect of 
stopping my ears, and of trying to distract myself by conversation with 


the bystanders ; but all was useless, and I continued to hear the voice 
in the same way. At last we reached land ; I proceeded to the hotel 
and busied myself with my trunks ; but the voice continued to harass 
me. After a time a servant came, and announced to me that a gentleman 
was at the door who wished to speak with me at once. ' Who is the 
gentleman?' I asked. ' M. Volterra,' was the reply. And M. Volterra 
entered, weeping violently in uncontrollable distress, and imploring 
me to follow him at once, and see his son, who was in a dangerous 

"I found a young man in a state of maniacal frenzy, naked, in an 
empty room, and despaired of by all the doctors of Zante for the last 
five years. His aspect was hideous, and rendered the more distressing by 
constantly-recurring choreic spasms, accompanied by hissings, howlings, 
barkings, and other animal noises. Sometimes he crawled on his belly 
like a serpent ; sometimes he fell into an ecstatic condition on his knees ; 
sometimes he talked and quarrelled with imaginary interlocutors. The 
violent crises were often followed by periods of profound syncope. When 
I opened the door of his room he darted upon me furiously, but I stood 
my ground and seized him by the arm, looking him fixedly in the face. 
In a few moments his gaze fell ; he trembled all over, and fell on the floor 
with his eyes shut. I made mesmeric passes over him, and in half an 
hour he had fallen into the somnambulic state. The cure lasted two 
months and a half, during which many interesting phenomena were 
observed. Since its completion, the patient has had no return of his 

A letter written to Count Gonemys by M. Yolterra, dated Zante, 
7th (19th) June, 1885, contains the most complete corroboration of the 
above statement in all that concerns the Yolterra family. The letter con- 
cludes as follows : 

" Before your arrival at Zante I had no acquaintance with you 
whatever, although I have been many years at Corfu as Deputy to the 
Legislative Assembly ; nor had we ever spoken together, nor had I ever 
said a word to you about my son. As I before said, we had never thought 
of you, nor desired your assistance, until I called on you on your arrival as 
officer of health, and begged you to save my son. 

" We owe his life first to you and then to mesmerism. 

" I hold it my duty to declare to you my sincere gratitude, and to 
subscribe myself affectionately and sincerely yours, 

" DEMETRIO VOLTERRA, Count Crissoplevri. 
(Additional signatures) " LAURA VOLTERRA " [M. Volterra's wife]. 

" DIONISIO D. VOLTERRA, Count Crissoplevri." 
" O 0gpa7reuSete Ava?<no; Bo^reppa." (Anastasio 

Volterra, the cured patient). 
" C. VASSOPOULOS (come testimonio) " 

The form of the monition here, as the form of the statement in 
the former cases, I should attribute to the percipient's shaping 
imagination. The narrative, however, will be seen to present one 


peculiarity which we have encountered in no other instance ; l at the 
time that the impression was received, the agent and the percipient 
were personally unknown to one another. Still, if my surmise be 
allowable as to the conditions by "which a line of telepathic com- 
munication may be established between persons unconnected by 
blood or affection, we might certainly find a likely condition in 
such an attitude as that of the supposed agent in this case. We 
cannot reasonably suppose that any casual stranger had as good 
a chance of being telepathically impressed by M. Volterra as the 
person who though his name and personality may have had no 
place in M. Volterra's mind was yet, by virtue of his special know- 
ledge and of his actual approach, more nearly connected than any 
one else with the engrossing subject of his thoughts. 

The following example, from a clergyman who unfortunately 
withholds his name from publication, is very similar, the inward 
nature of the sound being again noticeable. But here the agent and 
percipient were friends. 

(286) "In March, 187, I went to the curacy of A., and had been, as 
well as I remember, about a month there, when the following happened. I 
am a native of a town in the North of England, and in my childhood had 
a friend of my own age whom I will call C. Our friendship lasted till man- 
hood, though our circumstances and walks of life were very different ; and I 
had always a great deal of influence over him, insomuch that he would allow 
himself to be restrained by me when he would not by others. He became, 
towards his 20th year or so, rather addicted to drink, but I always had the 
same friendship for him, and would have done anything to serve or help 

"In 187 his family were living at X. (near Z.), and as all my 
other old friends had long left the neighbourhood of Z., my native town, I 
always used to go to them whenever I visited that part, as I was and am 
still on sufficiently friendly terms with them to go at any time without 
notice. On the day in question I had been visiting some of the parish- 
ioners, and having made an end of this, came to a cross-road of two of the 
lanes near the church ; and not only was I not thinking of my friend, whom 
I had not heard of for some years, but I distinctly remember what \ was 
thinking of, which was whether to go home to my lodgings for my tea, 
turning to the left, or whether to trespass on the hospitality of a lady who 
lived to the right of the crossing. "When thus standing in doubt, a kind of 
shudder passed through me, accompanied by a most extraordinary feeling, 
which I can only compare to that of a jug of cold water poured on the nape of 
the neck, and running down the spine; 2 and as this passed off, though I can- 
not say I hecurd a voice, I was distinctly conscious of the words, ' Go to Z. 
by this evening's train,' being said in my ear. There was no one at the 

1 A possible exception is case 30, Vol. i., pp. 214-8. 
2 Of. case 223, p. 37, and the note thereon. 


time within 100 yards of me. I was not very flush of money just then, 
and could not well afford the expense, besides not wishing to absent myself 
from duty so soon after taking it up. But it seemed so distinct that I 
almost made up my mind to obey it ;. but on announcing the fact to my land- 
lady, to whom, of course, I could not tell my true reason, she remonstrated 
so earnestly that, coupling this with the affairs of my duty, &c., I did 
conclude to disregard it. I could not, however, settle to anything, read, 
write, or sit in comfort, till the time was elapsed when I could have caught 
the train, when the uneasy, restless feeling gradually went off, and in a 
few hours I was ready to laugh at myself. 

" Three or four days after, I received the sad news that my friend had 
on that day gone down home from London, had been taken ill, and two 
days afterwards had, in a fit of temporary insanity, put an end to his 
life. I have no doubt in my own mind that had I obeyed the intimation 
I might have saved his life ; for I must have gone to their house, no 
other in the neighbourhood being available ; and had I found him in the 
condition in which he was, you may be very sure he would never have got 
out of arm's length of me until all danger was over. I have ever since 
reproached myself with it, a,nd have made up my mind that should I ever 
have such another experience I will do what is directed, seem it never so 
absurd or difficult." 

In reply to inquiries, the narrator adds : 

" I was in health just as usual, no better and no worse. I had good 
health all the time I was at A., and in particular I never have suffered 
from indigestion since I was a child. I have never at any other time 
had such a physical sensation, or such a sensation of a voice ; and nothing 
has ever happened to me which would lead at all satisfactorily to the 
conclusion that any abnormal phenomena were present." 

The narrator has privately told us the year of the occurrence, and 
the place where the suicide took place ; and we have verified these details 
in the Register of Deaths. The event took place later in the year than he 
imagined in November. In conversation, he has explained that " Go to Z." 
practically meant the same for him as " Go to these friends," as he would be 
quite certain to stay with them. Their place of business was still at Z. 
At the time of his experience, his friend was in a very critical condition. 

The next case is worth quoting as parallel to the two last, though 
it has less evidential force ; for, at this distance of time, we cannot 
majte sure that something had not occurred during the preceding 
days, that might have half unconsciously suggested to the percipient 
the need which he was so strangely impelled to relieve. The account 
is from Dr. Joseph Smith, for many years leading medical practitioner 
in Warrington, and a class-leader in the Wesleyan Methodist Church. 

" November 24th, 1884. 

(287) " When I lived at Penketh, about 40 years ago, I was sitting one 
evening reading, and a voice came to me, saying, ' Send a loaf to James 
Gandy's.' Still I continued reading, and the voice came to me again, 
' Send a loaf to James Gandy's.' Still I continued reading, when a third 


time the voice came to me with greater emphasis, ' Send a loaf to James 
Gandy's ' ; and this time it was accompanied by an almost irresistible 
impulse to get up. I obeyed this impulse, and went into the village, 
bought a large loaf, and seeing a lad at the shop door, I asked him if he 
knew James Gandy's. He said he did ; so I gave him a trifle and asked 
him to take the loaf there, and to say a gentleman had sent it. Mrs. 
Gandy was a member of my class, and I went down the next morning to 
see what had come of it, when she told me that a strange thing had 
happened to her last night. She said she wanted to put the children to 
bed, and they began to cry for food, and she had not any to give them ; 
for her husband had been for four or five days out of work. She then 
went to prayer, to ask God to send them something ; soon after which a 
lad came to the door with a loaf, which he said a gentleman gave him to 
bring to her. I calculated, upon inquiry made of her, that her prayer and 
the voice which I heard exactly coincided in point of time. 


5. I will now give one case where the sound heard, though vocal, 
was not articulate. 1 The seemingly direct reproduction of the actual 
sound which the agent was making (and therefore hearing) at the 
time recalls the first cases of this chapter ; but in the present instance 
there was no recognition, which is of course an evidential defect. The 
case is one where pros and cons have to be carefully balanced ; it 
has been admitted as the experience of a matter-of-fact man, but 
would certainly have been rejected had it been that of a nervous or 
imaginative woman. The narrator is Mrs. B., who contributed also 
case 192, (to which she refers in the first line,) and whose name may 

be given to anyone interested in the subject. 

" December, 1884. 

(288) " Some six years after the above occurrence, in the September 
of 1870, my husband was at D. Hall for his holiday. His parents were 
then living at Dieppe. He was roused one night by a peculiar moaning, as 
if some person or animal was in pain. He got up and went through the 
house and out into the gardens and shrubberies, but could see nothing. 
He heard the same noise at intervals all that day, but could not find out 
the cause. He returned to London next day, to find a telegram summon- 
ing him to Dieppe, as his mother was dying. When he got into the house 
at Dieppe, the first sound he heard was a repetition of the same noise that 
he heard at D. Hall, and he found it was his mother who was making it, 
and he learned she had been doing so for two days. She died a few hours 
after he arrived. We had no knowledge of Mrs. B.'s illness at the time 
my husband heard the noise. 

" My husband's parents had been obliged to leave D. Hall under 
painful circumstances, and possibly the thoughts of her loved home may 
have been paramount with Mrs. B., or it may have been that they flew to 

1 The strongest example in our collection that can be thus described is the scream 
case, No. 34, to which some "borderland" parallels are given in Vol. i., pp. 403-5. As 
possibly a direct reproduction of the agent's sensation, the present experience might be 
compared to cases 151 and 342. 


my husband, who was her youngest son. At any rate, my husband always 
held that it was his mother's moaning he heard at D. Hall though she was 
in France. She was speechless when he reached her, so no solution could 
be arrived at. " E. A. B." 

We find from a newspaper obituary that the death took place at 
Dieppe, on September 12, 1870. 

In reply to inquiries, the narrator says : 

" My late husband was alone, at his old home in Norfolk, when he 
heard the moaning I told you of. He was shortly after (the same after- 
noon, I think) telegraphed for to go to Dieppe to see his mother. He 
was quite unaware, till he got the telegram, that she was ill. He returned 
to Selhurst, where we were living, and where I was, on his way to Dieppe, 
and then told me about this noise. On his return from Dieppe, after his 
mother's death, he said, ' You remember my telling you of the moaning I 
heard at D. The first sound I heard in the house at Dieppe was the same, 
and it was my mother making it.' He further added that he was told she 
had made it for a day or two. I am perfectly clear about his hearing it 
first at night in the house, and on the following morning in the shrub- 
beries, which were a little distance from the house. I never heard either 
my husband or his father speak of ever hearing sounds, or seeing anything 
before or after the occurrences I have mentioned [i.e., this case and case 
192]. They were both matter-of-fact men, and very free from superstitious 
ideas. I was a young woman at the time these things took place (I am 
only 41 now), so my memory of them is very clear and good. Six weeks 
or two months after my husband heard these sounds, we were together at 
D., and he showed me the spot in the shrubbery where the sound had been 

f the percipient's experience had been confined to the moaning heard 
e night, the incident would not have been worth attending to, for 
reasons to be immediately adduced. But the continuance of the sound 
during the day, and out of doors, makes a decided difference.] 

6. We now come to a few specimens of the non-vocal sound- 
phantasms the mere noises or shocks which are the parallel among 
auditory hallucinations to the rudimentary visual hallucinations which 
were considered in the last chapter. But the auditory cases need a far 
more jealous scrutiny, before we are justified in regarding them as even 
probably telepathic in origin. Odd noises, especially at night, are very 
common phenomena ; and though the particular cause of them is 
often hard to detect, the physical conditions of our indoor life are 
prolific of possible causes- Most of us are in constant proximity to 
wind that may blow through crevices, and rattle or flap or dislodge 
loose parts of our windows and walls and chimneys ; and to water in 
pipes or cisterns that may leak, or burst, or may contain bubbling air; 
and to slates that may fall; and to wooden furniture and floors 
that may crack and creak. And if any one should say that he has 
heard a noise which, from its nature or its position, could not be 


accounted for by any such ascertainable cause, he might be reminded 
that sounds are the hardest things in the world to localise ; and that no 
one who has not given special attention to the subject can realise how 
easy it is to mistake the source and character of an auditory impres- 
sion. 1 Thus, while it is impossible to contend that the " ball of light " 
which appeared to Mr. Saxby was a real ball, and impossible therefore 
to deny that the coincidence of the hallucination with the death of 
some one to whom he was attached was an odd circumstance, it is 
quite possible to contend that some unaccountable crash which some- 
one has heard was not a hallucination at all, but a real objective sound ; 
and the coincidence of such a crash with the death of a near relative 
is the less odd in proportion as unaccountable crashes are common 
occurrences. Still, unaccountable noises are not of such daily and 
hourly occurrence but that a sufficiently large and well-established 
group of the coincidences in question might be taken as possible 

1 I may mention, as a marked instance of this, a personal experience which I have 
again and again repeated. The dripping of a small fountain, heard from some yards off, 
produces on my ears the precise effect of a heavy waggon which is being slowly dragged 
up a gravelly road at a considerable distance. 

The following is probably a case of mistaken localisation. The account is from the 
Rev. Edward Bonus, of the Rectory, Hulcot, Aylesbury. 

"July, 1882. 

"The house is the Rectory of in the county of Wilts. Of the two clergymen 

concerned, one is now dead ; the other has read through and signed this account, certify- 
ing its accuracy. This matter happened about 20 years ago. 

' ' One day, a friend of the then rector came on a visit for a few days, and rode on 
horseback. It was winter time. He put his horse into his friend's stables, and the two 
clergymen spent the evening together. They went to bed as usual about 11. During the 
night the friend heard the steps of a horse very distinctly on the stairs ; was not 
frightened, but greatly surprised. He at once got up, lighted his candle, and went down- 
stairs, but could see nothing, and now was frightened. He returned to bed, and shortly 
again heard the same noise ; again he got up, this time too frightened to go downstairs, 
but went to his friend's room. He was asleep, so he roused him, and told him what he 
had heard ; they then remained together, leaving the light. Very soon they both heard 
the noise in the most certain and distinct manner ; so they both dressed and searched the 
house could see or find nothing ; they then went to the stables, and to their sorrow the 
horse was dead. 

" They both believed the spirit of the horse had entered the house. The horse died 
of heart disease ; it was afterwards examined. Never again, as far as I have ever heard, 
was the same man visited by any kind of noise. 

" I was intimately acquainted with the two clergymen, and have heard them tell the 
story very many times. 


"This account is correct. H. S. L." 

What one may surmise to have happened is that the friends heard a sound resembling 
heavy steps, and inferred that it was on the stairs. We learn, on inquiry, that " a horse 
kicking in the stables could be distinctly heard in the house " ; which suggests the true 
nature of the particular horse's "agency " in the matter. 

In Morrison's Reminiscences of Sir W. Scott there is an account of the strange sounds 
like the drawing of heavy boards along the new part of the house which woke Scott 
and his wife on the night of the death of their friend, Mr. Bullock, who had lately been 
assisting them in the work of building and improving. The coincidence made a great 
impression on Scott, which, however, we cannot hold to have been justified. For Lock- 
hart's Life contains a letter of Scott's, from which it appears that the same sound had been 
heard on the preceding night, when, though "awaked by a violent noise," he only 
"fancied something had fallen, and thought no mor^ about it." 


indications of telepathic action, especially as we have the analogy 
of rudimentary visual hallucinations to point to. 1 Moreover, there is 
no doubt that surprising noises and crashes, though often due to 
undiscovered external causes, are also a form of purely subjective 
hallucination 2 which makes it at least probable, if telepathy be a 
reality, that they will also be a form of telepathic hallucination. 

The kinds of non- vocal impression which are least likely to be due 
to a real but undiscoverable cause in the vicinity are those which are 
distinctly 'musical the sound being produced not in the gliding 
random fashion of an ^Eolian harp, but in a series of well-defined 
tones. Some examples of literal music will be given in Chap. XVIII. 
But I will give here an example where the sound heard was of the 
ringing of bells, which is a known form of hallucination. 3 The 
narrator is a gentleman who does not wish his name and address to be 
published, though he has no objection to their being communicated 

"May 28th, 1885. 

(289) " In 1862, I sailed to Bombay in one of Dunbar's old frigate-built 
ships. I was depressed the whole voyage with an undefined presentiment 
of 'bad news from home.' At Bombay I used to get my messmates to go 
ashore for letters (a great privilege), even when it was my turn to do so ; 
my nervousness was so great. However, we sailed for home, and reached 
and left St. Helena, and no black letter was delivered to me. 

" Two days after leaving St. Helena I was up aloft doing some trifling 
sailor's work with the fourth officer, on the mizen topsail or top gallant 
yard, when I heard a bell begin to toll. I said to him, ' Do you hear that 
bell tolling ? ' ' No,' he said, ' I hear nothing.' However, my agitation 
was so great that I went down and examined both our bells ; and placed 
my arm near them, to see if they were vibrating or if any chance rope 
was swinging loose and striking them. However, while doing this, I still 
heard the boom of the tolling bell, and it seemed far away. I then, 
when I had satisfied myself that the sound was not attributable to either 
of our ship's bells, went up aloft and scanned the horizon in search of 
a sail, but saw none. I then said to my messmates, ' That's my " black 
letter." I knew I should have bad news this voyage.' 

1 A combination of rudimentary visual with rudimentary auditory hallucinations is 
recorded by Madame Guyon (La Vie de Madame Guyon, ecrite par elle-m4me } Paris, 1791, 
Vol. iii., p. 170) in a case, however, which cannot be presented as telepathic, inasmuch 
as Madame Guyon was expecting the death of the friend which coincided with the 
hallucination. The sight was a glimmer in the room, which caused some little gilt nails 
near the bed to glow : the sound was a crash as if all the window-panes in the house had 

2 See the statistics given in Vol. i., p. 503. 

3 For instance, no one is likely to explain as a misinterpretation of real sounds the 
case given by Mr. Kinglake in Eotfien, p. 239. In the midst of the desert he heard peal- 
ing for ten minutes, as it appeared to him, the familiar bells of his native village. I have 
received a very similar example from a lady who heard bells when leading a very solitary 
life in a remote part of India which is one of the 7 cases mentioned in Vol. i., p. 503. 
A second apparently telepathic case is No. 344. 


" At Falmouth we called for orders ; and there I found that a lady who 
filled the place of elder sister to me (my aunt by marriage), and to whose 
younger sister I am married now, had been suddenly carried off by illness 
at that time, as near as we could calculate, allowing for the different 
longitude. She was young (29), lovely, and most winning in her 
manners. I, boy-like, adored her, and she used to say that I was her young 
sailor lover ; as my uncle, a captain in the Navy, was her old sailor 

" I am 40 years old now, and have been through dangers of all sorts, 
in imminent danger of death many times, but I have never had a pre- 
sentiment since. After nearly 25 years I can still remember the boom, 
boom, of that old bell in the Manx churchyard, which I heard in latitude 14 
S., or thereabouts." 

Asked whether he had ever experienced a hallucination on any other 
occasion, the narrator replied : 

" I have never suffered from any hallucinations. I have led an active 
life, including much loneliness, being for weeks together in the jungles 
shooting and surveying alone, save for native servants, and far from white 
men, and during all that time my brain never played me any tricks." 
Later, he wrote : " I have not been a dreamer, fool, or a mystic, but a 
hard-working, clear-headed man of business. I tell you all this, not in a 
boasting spirit, but simply to prove, so far as possible, that I am not a 
likely subject for ' illusions ' or ' hallucinations.' You must remember that 
this occurred when I was a careless youngster of 17, on my first voyage to 
sea. I could not account for it then ; nor can I now. The impression is 
as vivid as ever." 

Asked whether any bells would have been ringing at the time of the 
lady's death, he says : 

" Yes. Malen Church bell would have been tolling in Castletown at 
that time, for the passing bell or for the funeral. I never asked whether 
the passing bell was rung, but it is a common habit in the Isle of Man to 
toll the church bell immediately after the decease of any one of some 
social importance. I feel sure it was done in this case ; we were so well 
known there. I mean it is done for the gentry, and such of the farmers 
and shopkeeping class who care to pay for it. 

" I may add that the lady who died was inexpressibly dear to me, being 
more like a sister than an aunt." 

The name of the lady was given to us in confidence, and also the date 
of her death ; and we have verified this date by reference to an Isle of 
Man newspaper. The day proved to be a Sunday. This was pointed out 
to our informant, in case he might be able to recall anything which would 
point to a Sunday as the day of his experience. He replied : 

" I cannot well remember the day, but I think that, from what I do 
remember, it was a Sunday. I was probably stowing the mizen top- 
gallant sail, or doing some necessary work up aloft ; but I remember that 
when I went down to look at the bells the ship was still, and I don't 
remember any work going on. I am, however, not certain on this matter." 


If this case was telepathic, it must remain doubtful whether the 
form of the impression represented the last sensations or ideas of 
the dying person, or was a piece of death-imagery supplied by the 
percipient, as illustrated in several of the visual cases of Chap. XII. 
The preceding distress and nervousness were probably subjective, but 
can scarcely be regarded as the cause of the hallucination. 

When we pass from musical impressions to noise proper, the 
degree of oddness and unaccountableness in a sound is a point which 
it is very hard to judge of from description. The reader may form 
his own opinion of the following account, received from Mrs. Samuda, 
of Shipton Court, Chipping Norton. I do not number it as an 
evidential case. 

" If the details of what occurred to me (and which I believe to have 
been purely accidental) can be of any service to your Society, I will with 
pleasure describe them ; but in doing so I must beg that you will 
thoroughly understand that I do not in the least believe in any of these 
coincidences, and at the time was much amused when I was told that 
the sounds I heard were death- warnings. On the 5th of October, 1878, 
about 3 o'clock in the morning, I was suddenly aroused by three distinct 
loud knocks exactly over the head of my bed. At the time I was ill, 
and the nurse was sleeping in my room. She also distinctly heard the 
sounds. The first thing the next morning, I received a telegram to say 
my grandfather, Sir Francis Grant, P.R.A., had died suddenly the night 
before at 8 o'clock. When I told the nurse of the telegram, she instantly 
said the three knocks I had heard were a death warning. 

"On the 20th March, 1879, I received a letter from my mother, saying 
that my brother, Rupert Markham, had been ill, but was now going on quite 
well again, and that I need not be the least anxious. On the morning of 
the 21st, about 3 o'clock in the morning, I distinctly heard the same 
three knocks ; my husband also heard them. At 10 o'clock that morning 
I received a telegram desiring me to come immediately, as my brother 
was dying. When I arrived at Melton Mowbray, 9.30 p.m., my brother 
was just dead. 

"About the 2nd of May, 1879, at 6 o'clock in the morning, my hus- 
band and I both heard the same three knocks, and were so much impressed 
at this occurring for a third time that he instantly made a note of it. 
At that time my eldest brother had just started for Zululand, so we much 
feared something might have happened to him. For three weeks after this 
we heard nothing, then a letter came saying my brother was dangerously 
ill, but shortly afterwards we heard by telegram that he was perfectly 
well again. I tell you this third instance to show you that there cannot 
possibly be anything but a mere chance in these accidents being repeated.' 7 

[The coincidence in the first case was probably closer than is repre- 
sented ; for all the newspaper accounts give the date of Sir F. Grant's death 
as Saturday, October 5th ; the Times and the Leicester Chronicle say "Satur- 
day morning" ; and the Daily Telegraph says, " early on Saturday morning." 

The Leicester Chronicle confirms the date of death in the second case.] 



Mrs. Samuda does not say whether she herself regards the 
knocks as hallucinations, or as objectively caused. If they were the 
former, then the question of " belief in these coincidences " i.e., the 
question whether they are due to "accident, or to telepathy must (as 
we have seen) be judged by the application of the doctrine of 
chances on a basis of very wide statistics ; and certainly will not be 
decided in favour of accident by the fact that the percipient has 
observed a coincidence in two cases and not in a third. But the coin- 
cidence with the death was not very close in the second case, and 
possibly not in the first ; and real sounds due to some defect in 
the house or furniture may have happened to be a little louder 
than usual on these occasions, and perhaps afterwards became 
exaggerated in memory. The fact that the experience was in each 
case shared by a second person is strongly (though, as we shall see 
later, not decisively) in favour of this view. 

The following case has more weight. The account was written 
down on June 2nd, 1876, by Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood, from the 
dictation of the percipient, the late Miss Vaughan, of 6, Chester 
Place, Regent's Park, N.W. 

(290) " In the autumn of 1856, Mrs. D. was lying dangerously ill, 
near Windsor ; when I received a letter on Friday from her daughter, who 
had been invited to the marriage of Mr. Cox with Miss Alderson, telling 
me that as their mother was rather better, they thought they might come 
up to the marriage on Tuesday if I could give them a bed. On 
the Saturday night I went to bed at my usual hour, 12 o'clock, but 
did not go to sleep for some time ; when I was suddenly startled by 
three sets of three extraordinary loud knocks, like strokes of a hammer on 
an empty box, at my bed head, followed immediately by a long loud 
cry of a woman's voice, which seemed to die away in the distance. I 
called my maid instantly, and begged her to look out of the window, and 
see if there was anyone in the street. She opened the shutters, threw 
up the window, and said there was no one ; that I must have been 
dreaming ; it was quite late. I said ' No, it had not yet struck 1,' and 
sent her to look at the clock ; she returned, and said it wanted 10 minutes 
to 1. I said the noise must have come from the room adjoining mine, 
in the next house. She said the house was empty ; but this I could not 
believe, so I sent her early on Sunday morning to see. She came back, 
saying the windows were all shut, and she had knocked for some time in 
vain. On the following morning I sent her to the person in Albany Street 
who had charge of the house, thinking somebody must have slept in it on 
Saturday night. The person in charge said this could not be the case, 
as she had the key ; but she went to look, and came to tell me that no one 
could possibly have got in. 

" In a very few hours afterwards I received a letter from one of the 
Miss D.'s, to tell me that their mother became suddenly worse on 


Saturday morning, and had died in the course of the night. Some time 
subsequently, I had an opportunity of seeing the nurse, and she told me 
that Mrs. D. had exactly died at a quarter before 1 on Sunday morning, 
uttering a loud cry at the moment of her death. She had just been giving 
her a cup of beef tea, and had replaced it on the mantelpiece, where there 
was a clock, on which she observed the hour. I had thought that the 
whole must have proceeded from the next house. 

" Mrs. D. had been a very intimate friend of mine ; I know I was 
much in her thoughts, and a few days before her death she had said she 
hoped, now she was a little better, to be well enough to see me." 

We find from the Register of Deaths that Mrs. D.'s death took place 
on a Sunday October 26th, 1856. 

In November, 1876, Mr. H. Wedgwood read the account of Miss 
Vaughan's vision to Miss E. T., a common friend of Miss Vaughan's and 
Mrs. D.'s, whom Mr. Wedgwood has known all his life. She was staying 
with her sister at Hastings at the time of the incident, and received a 
letter from Miss Vaughan telling them of Mrs. D.'s death, and of her 
having come to her. Miss T. was greatly interested in this intelligence, 
and hurried up to London, where she heard from Miss Vaughan the story 
exactly as narrated by Mr. Wedgwood, down to the news of Mrs. D.'s 
death ; but Miss Yaughan had not then seen the nurse, and was con- 
sequently ignorant of the precise agreement in time between the fact of 
her outcry at the moment of death and Miss Vaughan's hearing the 
scream. Two or three months after, Miss Vaughan told her what she had 
heard from the nurse. 

Miss T. has seen this statement, and appends the words : " Quite 
correct. E. H. T. November 5th, 1883." 

Mrs. Vaughan, of the Deanery, Llandaff, writing on June 10, 1886, 
sends us an account of the occurrence which differs from Miss Vaughan's 
only in one or two trifling details, and adds : " Miss Vaughan often spoke 
of it to us." 

The fact of the scream, though it seems to have corresponded with 
an actual cry of the supposed agent, could not be pressed ; as such 
sounds are not uncommon in London streets at night, and the loud- 
ness and apparent closeness of the cry may have been exaggerated. 
But the knocks in this case, if correctly described, seem less easy 
to explain, except as hallucination ; and the hallucination (if the 
present class be admitted at all) would have a primd facie claim to 
be considered telepathic the tie of affection between the two parties 
being a strong one, and the coincidence extremely close. Technically, 
the incident ought perhaps to be classed among " borderland " cases ; 
but this particular form of hallucination .does not seem to be specially 
connected with the moments that immediately precede or follow 
sleep; and the percipient must apparently have been wide awake 
before the sounds ceased. A few more examples of the non-vocal sort 
will be found among the " collective " cases in Chap. XVIII. ; others, 

VOL. II. K 2 


in view of the evidential weakness of the class, are relegated to the 

I will conclude this chapter with a case of a phantasm which, 
though located in the ear, perhaps rather concerned the sense of touch 
than that of hearing. If it was telepathic, it is a remarkably clear 
instance of the direct reproduction of the agent's sensation in the 
percipient's consciousness. 1 The account is from Mrs. Arthur Severn, 

of Brantwood, Coniston. 


(291) " Years ago, in Scotland, at my own home, I was in the drawing- 
room with my mother and aunt ; the latter was busy writing at a table in the 
middle of the room, facing my mother, who was on a sofa sewing, while I 
was quietly amusing myself in my own way. It was all very quiet, when 
suddenly I was much startled by my mother, who gave a scream and threw 
herself back on the sofa, putting both her hands up to cover her ears, 
saying, ' Oh, there's water rushing fast into my ears, and I'm sure either my 
brother, or son James, must be drowning, or both of them ! ' My aunt 
Margaret jumped up, and was rather angry and said, ' Catherine, I never 
heard such nonsense, how can you be so foolish ! ' My aunt seemed vexed 
and ashamed it should happen before me, for I was very frightened, and 
remember it all so vividly. My poor mother cried, saying, ' Oh, I know 
it's true, or why would this water keep rushing into my ears ? ' 

" Alas ! it proved too true, for very soon I could see people running very 
hard towards the bathing-place, and I remember the shudder that then ran 
through me, and the hope that my mother would not look out of any of 
the windows. Soon my uncle came hurrying to the house very white and 
distressed ; all he could say was, ' hot blankets ! ' but it was too late 
poor James was drowned. He was 21 years old, and my mother's eldest 
child. Both the other witnesses of this scene are dead. 


[The narrator's brother, James Agnew, was drowned while bathing in 
the river Bladnoch. The date, as we find from a copy of an inscription in 
Wigtown churchyard, was June 8, 1853.] 

It is to be noted that the narrator here was herself the percipient 
in the still more remarkable case of apparently direct transference, 
quoted in Vol. I., p. 188. 2 

1 Other drowning cases, on the other hand, if correctly described, afford an equally 
clear illustration of the percipient's independent investiture of the id_ea transferred, the 
impression being of the dripping of water a sound which would be neither in the agent's 
ears nor in his thoughts. See, e.g., cases 513 (1) and 528 ; and compare the account of the 
Breton tradition in the Dictionnaire Historique et Gtographique de la Province de Bretagne, 
by J. B. Og^e (Edition of 1845), Vol. i., p. 374. 

2 Other possible instances of hereditary or family susceptibility to telepathic influence 
are cases 14 and 15 ; the cases mentioned in Vol. i., p. 424, note ; cases 310, 497, and 
617 ; cases 413, 111, 161, 464 ; cases 232 and 561 ; cases 450 and 462 ; cases 421 and 503 ; 
cases 422 and 586 ; cases 496 and 532 ; case 562 ; and several of the collective cases in 
Chap, xviii., 2 and 6, and in the Supplement, Chap. ix. I may add that my collection 
of casual subjective hallucinations of the sane includes 4 cases where a parent and child 
have been affected at different times. In one of these cases (received from Mrs. Freese, 
of Granite Lodge, Chislehurst) the son's vision nearly reproduced the one whichhis mother 
had experienced years before. Another instance of hereditary susceptibility to halluci- 
nations is mentioned by Abercrombie ; see Vol. i., p. bcxxii. 




1. IN the chapter on "borderland " cases, and again in Chapter XII., 
when illustrating the development of hallucinations by the per- 
cipient's own imagination under the stimulus of a telepathic impulse, 
I quoted several instances in which two of his senses played a part 
as where an impression of sound preceded and led up to the visible 
phantasm. And I have mentioned (pp. 23-4) that the proportion 
of the telepathic cases in which the experience assumes such a 
complex or multiple form seems decidedly larger than obtains among 
the purely subjective hallucinations of the sane. The present chapter 
will contain those remaining telepathic instances which belong to 
seasons of complete waking consciousness. In some of these, as it 
happens, the sense of touch is involved; and I may take the oppor- 
tunity of saying a necessary word or two on affections of that sense. 
Among purely subjective hallucinations of the sane, those of touch 
seem to be rarer even than those of sight, and much rarer than 
those of hearing. My large collection includes only 68 examples (a 
few being cases of repeated experiences), of which 43 were of touch 
only, 8 were associated with a visual hallucination, 13 with an auditory 
hallucination, while 4 concerned all three senses. The canvassed group 
of 5705 persons (pp. 7, 8) yielded only 23 distinct experiences of 
the sort ; and of these 23, one occurred to a person who was out of 
health, one in association with a visual, and two in association with 
an auditory hallucination. Moreover, in many of the cases where touch 
alone has been concerned, it is easy to suppose that the sensation t 
was caused by an involuntary muscular twitch an instance is even 
on record where a hallucination of sight and sound took its origin in an 
objective sensation, caused by the momentary cramp of a muscle 1 

1 Paterson's paper in the Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal for Jan., 1843. 


so that the number of genuine tactile hallucinations would be even 
smaller than appears. It will not surprise us, then, to find that 
telepathic affections of this sense or what might reasonably be 
adduced as such are also rare. A couple of cases have been already 
quoted ; in neither of which did the touch suggest any human con- 
tact, while each included a peculiarity beyond the mere touch the 
first that of pain (Vol. I., p. 188), and the second probably that of 
sound (p. 132, above). We have, however, a few cases where the 
mere touch is alleged to have been more or less distinctive, 1 of which 
I will quote here one specimen. Mr. J. 0. Harris, of Wellington, 
New Zealand, proprietor of the New Zealand Times and New 
Zealand Mail, writes : 

"July 6th, 1885. 

(292) "My wife had an uncle, a sea captain, who was very fond 
of her as a child, and often, when at home at London, used to take 
her on his knee and stroke down her long thick hair. She, with 
her parents, went from London to Sydney, and her uncle pursued his 
avocation in other parts of the world. Some 3 or 4 years afterwards, she 
was upstairs, dressing for dinner, and had her hair loose upon her 
shoulders ; suddenly she felt a hand placed on the top of her head, and 
brought down smartly along her hair on to her shoulders. Startled, she 
turned round and exclaimed, ' Why, mother, how could you frighten me 
so ? ' for she assumed her mother had played a little joke on her. There 
was no one there however. When she related the circumstance at the 
dinner-table, a superstitious 2 friend present advised them to make a note 
of the day and date. This was done. In due course came the news of 
the death of her uncle, William, on that day allowing for difference of 
longitude at about the time she felt the hand on her head. 


The following is Mrs. Harris's own account of her experience : 
" Hill Street, Wellington, New Zealand. 

"December 5th, 1885. 

" I regret extremely that, anxious as we are to assist, in however 
small a degree, the cause of science, it is not in my power to give con- 
firmatory evidence of my own little experience. Of the friends who were 
associated with me at the time, but one is living, and she lives away in 
Queensland. The notes were not considered of sufficient consequence to 
be kept ; and neither mourning card nor obituary notice are available. 
Consequently my account cannot, as I quite understand, have much value, 
uncorroborated as it is. However, as a matter of courtesy, I will make 
my statement, feeling well assured that you will accept it as authentic. 

1 In 11 out of the 43 cases just mentioned, the touch is alleged to have been recognised, 
and in 7 of these the person whose presence was suggested was dead. There is no difficulty 
in regarding such cases as " after-images " ; but see Vol. i., p. 512, note. 

2 We are bound to accept Mr. Harris's description ; and can only wish that supersti- 
tion oftener took the form, as here, of prompting the only scientific course. 


" The occurrence happened so long ago that, while the incident is fresh 
enough to my memory, the precise date (never carefully noted) has 
escaped it. The year was 1860, the month April. I was a young girl, 
standing before the dressing-table in my bedroom, arranging some detail 
of my toilet. It was about 6 p.m., at that time of year, twilight, when 
suddenly a hand was placed upon my head, passed down my hair, and fell 
heavily on my left shoulder. Startled at the unexpected touch, I turned 
quickly to remonstrate with my mother for entering so quietly, when, to 
my surprise, I found no one there. On the instant my mind flew to 
England, whither my father had gone the preceding January, and I 
thought ' something has happened,' though what I could not define. 

" I went downstairs, and related my fright to the family. In the 
course of the evening, Mrs. and Miss W. came in, and, on commenting 
upon my paleness, were told about the matter. Mrs. W. immediately said, 
' Put down the date, and see what comes of it.' This was done ; and the 
incident soon ceased to trouble us, though the family awaited with some 
anxiety my father's first letter from home. It came in due time, and told 
how, when he reached England, he found his brother Henry seriously ill 
dying, in fact. As a child I had been his little favourite, and in death 
my name was the last word he uttered. 

" Upon comparing dates, and allowing for difference in longitude, we 
found that the time of my uncle's death coincided exactly with that of 
my strange experience. I recollected, too, that it was a familiar habit 
of my uncle to stroke my hair with a caressing touch. My mother, who 
resides with me, is the only person who can confirm the story, and she 
appends her signature to this, in confirmation thereof. 

(Attesting signature) " ELIZABETH BRADFORD." 

In answer to the question whether she has ever had a hallucination of 
the senses on any other occasion, Mrs. Harris replies : 

" This is the only experience of the kind in my life." 

We find from the Thame Gazette and the Oxford Chronicle that Mrs. 
Harris's uncle died on May 12, (not in April,) 1860, aged 51. 

[The coincidence here seems to have been very close, if we can trust 
Mrs. Harris's memory that a written note of the date of her impression 
was compared with the date of the death. But it will be seen that she 
did not at the time associate her experience with her uncle's former mode 
of touching her.] 

But the more conclusive cases of recognition are naturally those 
where a second sense has been concerned ; the element of touch being 
then a natural enough feature in a highly developed phantasmal 
impression. In the following case the second sense involved is that . 
of hearing. The account is in the words of Mrs. Stone, of Shute Haye, 
Walditch, Bridport ; it is attested, as will be seen, by the percipient. 

(293) "A well-known inhabitant of Walditch, a little village near 
Bridport, Dorset, died suddenly last May, 1881 . We were all very sorry, and 
felt much for those she had left. She was an honest, industrious woman, 
a good, affectionate wife and mother. She had been somewhat ailing for 


some time past, but there was no special cause for alarm, and my daughter 
saw her engaged (she was a washerwoman) in her usual occupation the 
day before her death. From her husband I heard the following narrative 
of facts, which he received from his son, when the latter came down to his 
mother's funeral : 

" ' My wife latterly was uneasy about one of her sons, Joseph Gundry, 
who is a pointsman on the Midland Railway, and had risen to an office of 
much responsibility. Not hearing from him for some time, she feared that 
he had fallen ill, and did not like to write till there should be no longer 
any cause for alarm. There was, in fact, such a press of business that he 
could not find time to write. On the night, or rather morning, of his 
mother's death, he had the night-duties, and, there being no train about, 
he sat down for a short time, leaning his arms on a table. He was not 
asleep and had hardly settled himself, when a hand was placed on his 
shoulder, and a voice said distinctly : ' Joe, your mother wants you.' As 
far as we can ascertain this was about the time that his mother passed 
away. He did not recognise the voice, and saw no one. As there is no 
post from Bridport that, could reach him under two days, his father tele- 
graphed. When the telegram was brought to him, he said, " I know what 
it is, my mother is dead." ' 

The percipient writes : 

" Hay Street, Sawley, Derby. 

"February 16th, 1883. 

" I have perused the attached, [i.e., thaabove account] and find it to be 
substantially correct. I attest the accuracy of the report as printed, and 
I am prepared to bear it out. " JOSEPH GUNDRY." 

Mr. Gundry further informs us that he has never on any other occasion 
experienced any sort of hallucination of the senses. 

In the next example the sense of sound is again concerned. The 
case might be added to those quoted in Chapter XII., 3, of the 
gradual development of telepathic hallucinations, leading finally to 
recognition. The narrator is the Rev. P. H. Newnham, late Vicar 
of Maker, Devonport, already so often mentioned. 

(294) "In July, 1867, 1 was living at Bournemouth, and was temporarily 
acting as chaplain to the Sanatorium there. A very sad case came in 
unexpectedly of a young man in the last stage of consumption. He was 
so ill that we could not take him into the institution, but accommodated 
him in lodgings. I visited him for some time, as his clergyman. Then the 
chaplain returned home ; and I myself left for my holiday. I did not 
expect to see the young man again ; but, to my surprise, on my return 
home, on September 21st, I found he was still alive ; and the doctors said 
he might yet live some weeks. 

" On Sunday, September 29th, I had been reading prayers at the 
chapel in the Sanatorium, and the chaplain preached at the evening 
service. It was near the end of the sermon, and about 8 o'clock, not 
later, but I cannot tell to five minutes. I suddenly felt a firm, but 
gentle touch on my right shoulder. So impressed was I with the instinct 


that this indicated the presence of some unseen being, that I at once 
asked ' Is it S.? ' (the Christian name of a pupil of mine, who died in 
1860). The answer came back at once, in the clear tones of the inner 
voice, 1 ' No, it's William.' I have no recollection of anything more. 

" After service was over, I inquired about my young friend, and was 
told that the matron had been sent for to him, as he was suddenly taken 
much worse. Next morning I heard that he died about 8.10. It was, 
therefore, about 10 minutes before his actual death that I experienced the 
communication. I may add that I had not been thinking specially 
about him, that I had not visited him, or received any message from 
him since my return, and that I had no reason whatever to expect his 
speedy decease. 

"P. .H. NEWNHAM." 

An obituary notice in the Lymington and Isle of .Wight Chronicle 
confirms the fact that William Bryer died on September 29, 1867. 

Mrs. Newnham corroborates as follows : 

" I perfectly remember my husband telling me, on his return home 
from the service at the Sanatorium Chapel, of the touch and voice, and 
saying he felt sure William was dead. He did not hear of his death till 
the next morning. u M> NEWNHAM .,, 

[Mr. Newnham seems to have a slight predisposition to subjective 
auditory phantasms, but has never experienced a similar vivid hallucina- 
tion of touch.] 

This can hardly be regarded as a subjective experience due to 
anxiety. Mr. Newnham had, no doubt, a certain emotional interest 
in the young man who died, and was aware of his critical condition. 
But if his hallucination had been a purely subjective one, caused by 
the latent emotional idea, one would certainly have expected that it 
would have taken a form suggestive of William ; whereas Mr. 
Newnham actually connected it at first with a different person. So 
that the non-recognition in this case tends to increase the probability 
of the telepathic explanation (cf. case 282 above). 

In the next case, the second sense involved is that of sight. The 
narrator is Mrs. Randolph Lichfield, of Cross Deeps, Twickenham. 
Her husband was precluded from attesting the account in writing, by 

a painful affection of the hand. 

" 1883. 

(295) " I was sitting in my room one night, before I was married, close 
before a toilet-table, on which the book I was reading rested ; the table 
fitted into the corner of the room, and the wide glass on it reached nearly 
to the ceiling, so that any one in the room could be seen full length. The 
book I was reading was not at all calculated to affect my nerves, or excite 

1 See Vol. i., pp. 480-1. 


my imagination in any way. I was perfectly well, in good spirits, and 
nothing had occurred since receiving my morning's letters, to remind me of 
the person concerned in the strange experience you have asked me to relate. 

" My eyes were fixed on my book, when suddenly I felt, 1 but did not 
see, some one come into my room. I looked straight before me into the 
glass to see who it was, but no one was visible. I naturally thought that 
my visitor, seeing me deep in my book, had gone out again, when, to my 
astonishment, I felt a kiss on my forehead a lingering, loving pressure. 
I looked up, without the least sensation of fear, and saw my lover standing 
behind my chair, stooping as if to kiss me again. His face was very white 
and inexpressibly sad. As I rose from my chair in great surprise, before 
I could speak, he had gone, how I do not know ; I only know that, one 
moment I saw him, saw distinctly every feature of his face, saw the tall 
figure and broad shoulders as clearly as I ever saw them in my life, and 
the next moment there was no sign of him. For the first minute I felt 
nothing but surprise ; perplexity expresses better what I mean ; fear, or 
the idea I had seen a spirit, never entered my mind ; the next sensation 
was that there must be something the matter with my brain, and a feeling 
of thankfulness that it had not conjured up some terrific vision, instead of 
an agreeable one. I remember praying that I might not fancy anything 
that would frighten me. 

" The next day, to my great surprise, there was not my usual morning's 
letter from him ; four posts came in and no letter ; all the next day, no 
letter. I naturally objected to the novel feeling of finding myself 
neglected, but should not have thought of letting the neglector know it, so 
would not write to inquire the cause of his silence. On the third night 
still no letter all day as I was going upstairs to bed, thinking of 
something totally unconnected with R., as I put my foot on the top stair, 
I felt, suddenly, but most intensely, that he was in my room, and that I 
could see him just as I had done before. For the first time came the fear 
that something had happened to him. I knew well how intense his desire 
to see me would be, and thought ' Could it have been really that I saw 
him the other night ? ' 

" I went straight to my room, convinced I should see him ; there was 
nothing to be seen. I sat down and waited, and the sensation that he was 
there, and striving to speak to me, and to make me see him, became 
stronger and stronger. I waited till I became so sleepy I could not sit 
up any longer, and went to bed and to sleep. By the first morning's post 
I wrote and told him I feared he must be ill, as I had not had a letter for 
three days. I said not one word of what I have told you in this. Two 
mornings after, I had a few lines, shockingly written, to tell me he had 
hurt his hand out hunting, and could not hold a pen till that day, but was 
in ' no danger.' It was not till a few days after, when he could write 
distinctly, that I knew the whole truth. 

" This is it. He had been riding an Irish hunter, a splendid horse 
across country, but a most vicious creature. This horse was so used to 
getting rid of any one he found on his back, if he objected to their 
presence there, and had such a variety of methods of doing so, throwing 

1 If, as is probable, tins feeling was due to a faint auditory hallucination (Vol. i., p. 
528, second note), the case would be one of the rare instances of hallucination of three 
senses. Compare Nos. 185, 306, 313, 504, 513 (1), 569. 


grooms, huntsmen, any one, when the fit seized him, and when he found 
no amount of rearing, kicking, no bolting, and stopping suddenly, no 
' buck-jumping ' would unseat my fiance, and that he had at last found his 
master, he became desperate. He stood still for an instant, then rushed 
across the road backwards, reared perfectly straight, and pressed his rider's 
back against the wall. The crush and pain were so intense, R. thought it 
must be death, and remembered saying, as he lost consciousness, ' May, 
my little May ! don't let me die without seeing her again.' It was that 
night he had bent over and kissed me. He turned out not to be really 
injured, though, of course, in frightful pain, and his hand could not 
possibly hold a pen. The night I felt so suddenly and so certainly that I 
should see him, and, when I did not, felt so thoroughly he was there and 
trying to let me know it, he was at the time worrying himself about not 
writing to me, and wishing intensely that I might feel there was some 
reason for his silence. 

" I told my mother [since deceased] all, just as I have told you, and 
she advised me to say nothing about his supposed visit to me till he was 
quite strong and well again, and I could do so personally. When he came 
to see me afterwards, I made him tell the whole of his account before I 
mentioned one word of my strange experience of those two nights. 

" 1 have just read this over to him, and he vouches for my having 
exactly described his share of this strange experience." 

2. The remaining cases involve the senses of sight and hearing. 
The following account is from the Rev. J. A. Haydn, LL.D., Rector of 
Nantenan, Co. Limerick, and was first communicated by him to the 
Oxford Phasmatological Society. 

" Nantenan Glebe, Askeaton. 

"June 18th, 1883. 

(296) " I beg to submit to your Society the following brief narrative, 
extracted from my diary. 

" Nine miles from my residence, in the town of Adare, Co. Limerick, 
lived a gentleman, named Phillips, and his wife. They were on terms of 
unusually close and affectionate intercourse with myself and my family; 
they frequently driving over to spend the day here, and we as frequently 
returning the visit. 

"On Thursday, October 16th, 1879, the accouchement of Mrs. Phillips 
took place ; it had been anticipated with some anxiety by her medical 
attendant ; but we were gratified to learn by a letter from Mr. Phillips 
that the event had passed without evil consequences, and that his wife 
was rapidly recovering. 

"Matters were in this condition when, at 10 o'clock on the night of 
the ensuing Wednesday, October 22nd, I went to bed as usual. I slept in 
a little bedstead in an angle of my study downstairs ; all the members of 
the household sleeping in the upper story. I had seen the doors fastened^ 
and the children and servants were all in bed. As is my custom, I was 
reading in bed, when, in the midst of the hitherto unbroken silence, I 
heard quick, light footsteps, evidently those of a female, proceeding along 
the hall, as if entering from the front door, and then traversing the 
passage that leads to my study door. 


" Arrived immediately outside, they seemed to me to resemble those of 
a person in the dark, vaguely trying to find where the door was. Under 
the full impression that my wife had come downstairs, I called her name 
loudly, and asked what was the matter. While I spoke, the noise ceased, 
but it recommenced immediately ; and while I stared at the door, I both 
heard and saw the handle turned halfway round, 1 and then let go, as if 
the person entering had changed her mind. Surprised and alarmed, I 
sprang up with the lamp in my hand and opened the door. All was 
perfectly still and silent without. None of the household had stirred, nor 
was any door opened that had been closed. 

" I returned to bed, and some few minutes after I heard the clock 
strike 11. No further disturbance occurred. This happened, observe, on 
Wednesday night, October 22nd, at a little before 11 o'clock. 

" On Friday morning I got a letter from Canon O'Brien, the rector of 
Adare, to say that Mrs. Phillips had died on Thursday morning. I 
immediately set out to Adare to see my bereaved friend, and found him 
almost beside himself with grief. Mrs. Phillips, while in other respects 
advancing to convalescence, had suddenly been seized with scarlatina, 
which had proved fatal. Thinking it might ease my poor friend to tell me 
the sad details, I encouraged him to speak on the subject. He complained, 
as one of his bitterest griefs, that for the last night of her life his wife was 
delirious, and did not know him or her mother, who was present. ' She 
sank gradually on Wednesday,' he said, ' and lost her senses on that 
night raving about persons and places that had been familiar to her, 
and evidently fancying herself actually present in distant spots. You were 
one of the first-mentioned ; she imagined that she was in your house 
speaking to you. I quietly asked whether he happened to have any idea 
as to what hour this was at, when he answered, ' A few minutes before 11, 
as I distinctly remember looking at my watch.' 

"Thus, at the very time that I, nine miles away, heard the un- 
accountable noises, my dying friend was speaking and acting as if she 
were in my presence. It seems impossible not to connect the circumstances. 


In answer to our inquiry whether he had ever experienced any other 
hallucination, Mr. Haydn replies, " My senses have never on any occasion 
played me false." He further explains : 

" The facts of the narrative and its dates are extracted from the 
diary, but not the actual language. Those facts were written by me in 
my diary immediately after their occurrence ; my custom, as a general 
rule, being to record the events of any given day 011 the following morning. 
The actual extracts I can give, if required, and should be happy to do so. 
The story, as told in the printed slip [i.e., the above account], is accurate in 
all particulars, and most utterly reliable. I may add, and deeply regret to 
do so, that poor Phillips himself has since died." 

The following are the verbatim extracts from the diary : 

" Thursday, October 16th, 1879. Birth Phillips. On the 16th inst., the 
wife of John D. Phillips, S. I. Adare, Royal Irish Constabulary, of a son." 

"Thursday, October 23rd, 1879. A most singular thing occurred 
last night. Just after going to bed, while I was reading, I heard steps 

1 See p. 612 note, and compare cases 696 and 698. 


outside my door and in the passage, as of a female walking aimlessly. 
Thinking it might be Louey, I called, but there was no answer. Imme- 
diately after the sounds ceased, the clock struck 11." 

" Friday, October 24th, 1879. Letter from Lucius O'Brien, to say 
and it was appalling news that Mrs. Phillips is dead ! She died 
yesterday morning, of fever and scarlatina. I at once determined on 
going over to Adare, although the roads were knee-deep and the day 
savagely showery. I can never forget the agony of poor Phillips. 
He told me that she was getting rapidly worse all day on Wednesday, 
and that at about half-past 10 on Wednesday night she became delirious, 
and raved of places where she had been" 

The Limerick Daily Chronicle confirms Oct. 23, 1879, as the date of 

The hallucination here, if telepathic, well illustrates the manner 
in which the impression received may be developed by the percipient 
(Vol. I., pp. 539-40). The dying woman's thoughts, in turning to her 
friend, would naturally be of seeing him and speaking to him, not of an 
ineffectual attempt to enter his room. But the impression which the 
brain externalised seems to have got no further than the suggestion 
of a strange and unexpected visit. 

The next account is from Miss Paget, of 130, Fulham Road, S.W. 
It will be seen that the words which the percipient heard may not 
unnaturally be referred to the sudden idea in the agent's mind that 
his unforeseen accident would probably get him into a scrape. 

"July 17th, 1885. 

(297) " The following is the exact account of the curious appearance to 
me of my brother. It was either in 1874 or 1875. My brother was third 
mate on board one of Wigram's large ships. I knew he was somewhere on 
the coast of Australia, but I have no recollection of my having been think- 
ing of him in any special way ; though as he was my only brother, and we 
were great friends, there was a very close bond always between us. My 
father was living in the country, and one evening I went into the kitchen 
by myself, soon after 10, to get some hot water from the boiler. There 
was a large Duplex lamp in the kitchen, so it was quite light ; the 
servants had gone to bed, and I was to turn out the lamp. As I was 
drawing the water, I looked up, and, to my astonishment, saw my brother 
coming towards me from the outside door of the kitchen. I did not 
see the door open, as it was in a deep recess, and he was crossing 
the kitchen. The table was between us, and he sat down on the 
corner of the table furthest away from me. I noticed he was in 
his sailor uniform with a monkey jacket on, and the wet was 
shining on his jacket and cap. 1 I exclaimed, ' Miles ! Where have you 
come from 1 ' He answered in his natural voice, though very quickly, 
' For God's sake, don't say I'm here.' This was all over in a few 
seconds and as I jumped towards him he was gone. I was very much 

* Compare cases 513, 520, 535, 537. 


frightened, for I had really thought it was my brother himself ; and it 
was only when he vanished that I realised it was only an appearance. I 
went up to my room and wrote down the date on a sheet of paper, which 
I put away in my writing-table, and did not mention the circumstance to 
any one. 

"About three months afterwards my brother came home, and the 
night of his arrival I sat with him in the kitchen, while he smoked. I 
asked him in a casual manner if he had had any adventures, and he said, 
' I was nearly drowned at Melbourne.' He then told me he was 
ashore without leave, and on returning to the ship, after midnight, he 
slipped off the gangway between the side of the ship and the dock. There 
was very little space, and if he had not been hauled up at once, he must 
have been drowned. He remembered thinking he was drowning, and 
then became unconscious. 1 His absence without leave was not found out, 
so he escaped the punishment he expected. I then told him of how he had 
appeared to me, and I asked him the date. He was able to fix it exactly, 
as the ship sailed from Melbourne the same morning, which was the 
reason of his fear of being punished, as all hands were due to be on 
board the evening before. The date was the same as the date of his 
appearance to me, but the hours did not agree, as I saw him soon after 10 
p.m., and his accident was after midnight. He had no recollection of 
thinking specially of me at the time, but he was much struck by the 
coincidence, and often referred to it. He did not like it, and often 
when he went away said, ' Well, I hope I shan't go dodging about as I 
did that time.' 

" I was about 22 at the time, and he was 20. I was always rather 
afraid I might see him or others after this, but I have never, before 
or since, had any hallucination of the sense of sight. My brother died 
abroad three years ago, and I had no warning then, nor do I imagine I 
shall ever see anything again. I am never on the look out for things of 
that kind, but if I ever saw anything again I would make a note of it. 
1 destroyed the note I made of the date as soon as I had verified it, not 
thinking it could interest or concern anyone else. R UTH PAGET " 

[I received a third-hand account of this incident two years before the 
above was written, and this older account completely agreed with the 
present more recent one; which shows, at any rate, that the inci- 
dents stand out with distinctness in Miss Paget's memory. In 
conversation, Miss Paget told me that at the moment when she mistook 
the apparition for her brother himself, she accounted for the wetness, 
which she so distinctly remarked, by supposing that he had got wet 
through with rain. She is quite sure that the coincidence of night 
was clearly made out, when she and her brother talked the matter 
over which of course makes her statement as to the coincidence of date 
technically incorrect, as the accident occurred after midnight. If longitude 
be allowed for, the impression must have followed the accident by about 
10 hours.] 

The next case is from Marian Hughes, confidential maid and 
secretary to Miss Julia Wedgwood, of 31, Queen Anne Street, W. 

1 See p. 26. 


"December, 1882. 

(298) " In the winter of 1878, my sister, Mrs. Barnes, was much pressed 
to marry a man named Benson, who was much attached to her ; and not 
succeeding in his suit, he told her if she would not marry him, he would 
take employment in India. He obtained a situation to go out to Madras. 

" One Saturday night, about 9 o'clock, I, in the following spring, went to 
see my sister ; she was much agitated, and told me that, just before I came 
in, she had been on her knees scrubbing the floor of a room on the ground 
floor (with a window that anyone could stand at and look in), when she- 
heard herself called twice, ' Annie, Annie,' and looking up at the window, 
she saw what looked to her like the face of the friend who had wanted to 
marry her. She at once got up and rushed out, but finding no one there 
became convinced she had seen an apparition announcing the death of her 
friend. On the following Monday, she sent to the firm in the City with 
which he was connected, and was informed that he had been ill, but was 
better when last heard of. Shortly afterwards, knowing Mr. H. Wedg- 
wood's interest in this kind of story, I informed him of the occurrence, 
before it was known how it fared with my sister's friend in India. 

" My sister, some weeks afterwards, told me that she had learnt from 
his employers in the City that he had died on the evening of the day she 
had seen the apparition in London. " MARIAN HUGHES." 

The Registrar of the Diocese of Madras writes to us that he can find 
no record of Benson's burial ; and an exhaustive search in the records of 
the India Office has been equally unsuccessful. We learn, however, from 
the India Office that the returns do not profess to be absolutely complete. 

Writing on the case on March 4, 1883, Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood says : 

" The story was told me by Marian Hughes, my daughter's confidential 
maid and attached friend, whose truthfulness may be entirely relied on. 
I wanted to hear it from her sister herself, but found that she considered it 
too solemn a subject to speak about. I was told of the apparition of the 
friend in India shortly after it occurred, and requested Marian to inform 
me as soon as they had news of the result." He adds : 

" My note of the case [i.e., the original note made when he first heard 
Marian Hughes' account] was dated May 16th, 1878. I say, 'One Satur- 
day evening about six weeks ago,' &c. On July 19th, in an article, I say, 
'By the end of June it was known that Annie's friend had died 
suddenly on the evening of Saturday, 30th March, the day noted by 
Annie as the day of the apparition.' " 

[Mrs. Barnes has had an auditory hallucination on one other occasion, 
when she heard herself called by the voice of her husband, who, it 
turned out, had died at a distance two days before.] 

It is rare for nautical stories to reach the level of evidence. The 
following, however, is a case where the testimony seems hardly to 
leave room for a doubt that a hallucination of a particular kind was 
experienced at a particular crisis ; and the question of its interpretation 
is a matter not of nautical but of scientific judgment. The statement 
(which was first published in the Spiritualist) was drawn up sixteen 


days after the incident occurred, through the prompt energy of Mr. W. 
H. Harrison, and on the suggestion of the late Mr. Cromwell F. Varley, 
F.R.S., who had questioned Captain Blacklock on the subject. 

(299) " The steamship ' Robert Lowe' returned to the Thames on Tues- 
day, October llth, 1870, from St. Pierre, Newfoundland, where she had been 
repairing one of the French Atlantic Telegraph Company's cables. An 
engineer on board, Mr. W. H. Pearce, of 37, Augusta Street, East India 
Road, Poplar, was taken ill with the typhus fever, and on the 4th of 
October last he died. One of his mates, Mr. D. Brown, of 1, Edward 
Street, Hudson's Road, Canning Town, Plaistow, a strong, healthy man, 
a stoker, not likely to be led astray by imagination, attended him till the 
day before he died. [Brown, it appears, bore the best of characters, and 
had a strong friendship for Pearce.] On the afternoon before his death, 
at 3 o'clock, in broad daylight, Brown was attending the sick man, who 
wanted to get out of bed, but his companion prevented him. And this is 
what the witness says he saw : 

" ' I was standing on one side of the bunk, and while trying to pre- 
vent Pearce from rising, I saw on the other side of the bunk, the wife, 
two children, and the mother of the dying man, all of whom I knew 
very well, and they are all still living. They appeared to be very sorrow- 
ful, but in all other respects were the same as ordinary human beings. I 
could not see through them ; they were not at all transparent. They had 
on their ordinary clothes, and, perhaps, looked rather paler than usual. 
The mother said to me in a clearly audible voice, " He will be buried on 
Thursday, at 12 o'clock, in about fourteeen hundred fathoms of water." 
They all then vanished instantly, and I saw them no more. Pearce did 
not see them, as he was delirious, and had been so for two days previously. 
I ran out of the berth in a state of great excitement, and did not enter it 
again while he was alive. He died on Tuesday, not Thursday, and was 
buried at 4 o'clock, not 12. 1 It was a sudden surprise to me to see the 
apparitions. I expected nothing of the kind, and when I saw them I 
was perfectly cool and collected. I had never before seen anything of 
the kind in my life, and my health is, and always has been, good. About 
five minutes afterwards I told Captain Blacklock I would stop with the 
sick man no longer, but would not tell him why, thinking that if I did, 
nobody else would take my place. About an hour later, I told Captain 
Blacklock and Mr. Dunbar, the chief engineer, whose address is Old 
Mill, near Port William, Wigtownshire, Scotland.' 

" The other sailors on board say that they saw that Mr. Brown was 
greatly agitated from some cause, and they gradually drew this narrative 
out of him." Captain Blacklock says: 

" Brown came down into the cabin, looking very pale and frightened, 
and declared in a strong and decided way that he would not attend the 
sick man any more on any conditions not for a thousand pounds. I told 

1 This markedly illustrates the absence, from first-hand and immediate accounts, of 
the spurious marvels which have done so much to mask the facts of telepathy. It would 
be a tolerably safe prophecy that in any third-hand version of this occurrence the great 
point would be that the death and burial took place on the day and at the hour predicted. 


him that he ought to attend a sick and dying comrade, especially as a 
storm was raging, and he needed kind and considerate help, such as any 
of us might need one day. I pressed him all the more, as I wanted a 
strong steady man to attend the delirious invalid ; besides, it being bad 
weather, the other men were fagged and over- worked. Brown would not 
go back, and he left the cabin, as I think, crying, so I sent him out a 
glass of brandy. Shortly after that, I heard he was very ill, and that his 
mates had some trouble in soothing and calming him. 

" We the undersigned, officials on board the ' Robert Lowe,' declare the 
above statements to be true, so far as each of the circumstances came 
under our personal notice, but we none of us commit ourselves to any 
opinion as to the cause of the phenomenon. We give the statement 
simply because we have been requested to do so, rumours of the occurrence 
having gone abroad and caused inquiries to be made. 

(Signed) " J. BLACKLOCK, Commander." 

" ANDREW DUNBAR, First Engineer. 

(Signatures of six other members of the crew.) 

"Witness, W. H. HARRISON. 

" October 20th, 1870." 

[Captain Blacklock is dead. The "Robert Lowe" was lost in 1872, 
and only one or two of the crew escaped. The account included a descrip- 
tion of some distressing experiences of Mrs. Pearce's, which had occurred 
in London during the few days before her husband's death, and filled her 
with anxiety on his account ; but this anxiety cannot be safely assumed 
to have been in any way a condition of Brown's experience.] 

It cannot, of course, be proved that this was not a case of 
purely subjective hallucination, as Brown knew the Pearce family by 
sight. But the vision, both in its character and its effects, was un- 
like any of those which were treated above (Vol. I., Chap. XI.) as due 
to expectancy or anxiety. And we at any rate have the coincidence 
that a healthy man experienced the one hallucination of his life and 
an extremely vivid and highly-developed specimen in broad daylight, 
at a time when the friend in whose beclouded mind the very scene 
evoked may well have been dominant, was dying in close proximity to 
him. 1 

The following is another nautical case, as to which it is not easy 
to form an opinion. The points against it are that it is from an 
uneducated witness ; and that it contains an account of an experience 
which in one respect the length of its duration has scarcely a 
parallel, as far as I know, among hallucinations of sane and healthy 
persons. 2 Nevertheless, unless the account is an absolute fabrication, " 

1 As regards the supposition that the agent was the sick man himself, cf. case 30, 
Vol. i., pp. 214-6. As to the appearance of more figures than one, see the remarks on 
case 202. 

2 See however cases 590 and 621. 



which seems very unlikely, the reasonable conclusion, I think, 
would be that a telepathic hallucination was produced, though its 
details may have been exaggerated. Mr. Louis Lyons, of 3, Bouverie 
Square, Folkestone, wrote, on October 21st, 1882 : 

(300) " Some time ago, my son told me that a friend of his, a rough and 
simple-minded fellow, had returned from Shields, and told him a curious 
tale. The man is a sailor, and had served with his father ever since he 
was a boy, in a collier which trades between this port and the North. The 
youth, having become very proficient in his calling, went on his voyages, 
leaving his father, now an elderly man, at home. During a stormy voyage, 
and not far off the Humber, the young sailor saw his father, whom he had 
left in excellent health, pacing the deck, and calling out several times, as 
he was wont to do, ' Mind your helm, Joe ! ' The young man wished to 
speak to his father, but could not ; some occult power prevented him. At 
the end of the voyage a letter awaited the young sailor, announcing the 
death of the father at the precise time when he appeared to his son ; but 
please to remark (a matter of some importance, I think,) that the appari- 
tion remained on deck some three hours, until the vessel got to Grimsby. 
[This differs from the first-hand account.] 

" I disbelieved my son's story, and requested him to ask his friend to 
come and take tea with me, that I might hear the account from his own 
mouth. He came. The simplicity of his manner, his plain, open-hearted 
account, and I may even say his stupidity, manifested in his peculiar 
diction, imparted an impress to his tale." 

At our request Mr. Lyons interrogated Edward Sings more formally, 
the next time that the latter visited Folkestone. The following is Sings' 
own account : 

" Folkestone. 

"December 29th, 1882. 

" I left my father last about six years ago, on a Good Friday. He was 
in good health when I left him. We were in a gale of wind, and we were 
running in the Humber ; we carried the main gaff away ; I was at the 
wheel steering her in. He came to me 3 or 4 times, tapped me on the 
shoulder, and told me to mind the helm, and I told the captain my father 
was drowned, or something happened to him. After we got in, when it 
was my watch, he was walking to and fro with me, and I went down below 
and told my mate I could not stop up, and I did not like to. My mate 
took my watch. I never could speak to my father, for something kept me 
from doing so. I heard of my father's death a week afterwards. No one 
else saw my father's spirit. 1 My father stopped on deck with me an hour, 
and as I could not stand it any longer I went below, and my mate took 
my place. We cast both anchors, and were towed into Grimsby. My 
mother and sister were at my father's death-bed, and they told me that 
my father asked several times whether I was in the harbour. 

" I certify this to be a true account. " EDWARD SINGS." 

We find from the Register of Deaths that E. Sings' father died on 

1 See p. 48, note. 


April 7, 1877, aged 53. Good Friday fell on March 30; and this, it 
will be seen, corresponds very well with the above statement. 

Mr. Lyons has kindly visited Sings' mother and sister, at 67, Tontine 
Street, Folkestone, and received a similar account from them. 

The next case is from a lady whose name may be given privately. 
She herself would have been perfectly willing that it should be 
published, because the incident " is as natural and real to me as any 
other event in my life " ; but she thinks that the publication might 

give annoyance to some of her relatives. 

" C Rectory. 

" May 23rd, 1884. 

(301) " In June, 1878, when nursing a brother who was ill, I woke up 
suddenly about 2 o'clock on the night of the 24th, calling him, and 
feeling strongly that he wanted me. I jumped up and went to the 
table, intending to get his medicine, as I was in the habit of doing by 
day, but the touch of the table brought me to my senses, and I went 
back to bed, thinking it was merely fancy. I was 17 then, quite strong 
and well, and had never been conscious of any such impression before. 
My sister, who slept in a room opening off mine, heard me call my 
brother's name, and came in to see what I was doing, and stayed with me 
for some time. 

" On asking my brother the next morning what sort of night he had 
had, he said, ' Very wakeful at first, but after you came in at 2 o'clock I 
went to sleep all right.' I said nothing to him of my experience at that 
hour, but told him I had never been in his room all night. He answered, 
' Of course you were ; you came in and gave me my drops, and settled my 
pillows, and then I got up and did what you told me,' which was opening 
the window. I assured him I had done nothing of the kind, when he said 
quite impatiently, ' I couldn't have imagined it unless you had ; but you 
mustn't do it again or you will catch cold, running about the house at 

" I said no more about it for fear of alarming him, and I never told 
anyone of it, lest they should think the nursing was making me ill, but 
I was quite strong and well at the time. I put it down in my note-book 
that day, and a year later I have another reference there to this same 

"Two months later, in August, 1878, I was in Hampshire, my brother 
in Sussex. I knew he was dying, but had no reason for thinking him in 
any more immediate danger on that day. About 9 o'clock, during break- 
fast, a sudden feeling of great depression came over me, which increased 
and I could not shake it off all the morning, though I did not particularly 
connect it with my brother. One of my sisters noticed it, and asked if I 
felt ill. Later on, a telegram came to say that my brother had died quite 
suddenly, a few minutes past 9 o'clock. I only mention this because it 
was the only other occasion on which I ever remember being conscious of 
such a sensation. 

"K. A. O." 

[This last coincidence may easily, of course, have been accidental.] 

VOL. II. L 2 


Miss 0. adds : 

"My sister is away from home, so I wrote to her without giving any 
reason for wanting her evidence, and tried to say nothing that would 
recall this occurrence to her mind. I simply asked her, ' Do you re- 
member your coming into my room one night during H.'s illness ? If 
you do, I want a written statement of what you remember.' 

" I enclose her reply. She mentions that I called his name, and that 
she found me crying, which was true, as the impression that he wanted 
me was so strongly upon me, and yet I believed it to be fancy. She 
knows that I never left my room, otherwise I might have thought that 
I had really gone down the passage to my brother's room, which was at 
the other end, but I never walked in my sleep in my life. 

" My brother was so positive about it that I felt certain he believed I 
had actually done what I had tried to do in my own room. It seemed 
perfectly natural to me, but I said nothing to my people, for fear. they 
should think the strain of nursing would make me ill. 

"These are the references in my note-book: On June 25th, 1878, 
among other things about my brother, ' He said that in the night he 
woke up, firmly persuaded that I had been in his room, and was talking 
to him, and he got up at once, and did exactly as I told him.' On 
June 24th, 1879: 'It was this night last year that I woke up in the 
middle of the night calling H., and then E. came in. And the next 
morning he told me that just at that moment he thought I came into his 
room, and he got up to do as I told him.' 

" I can't account for his thinking I told him to open the window, 
unless from the fact that I got up and went over to the window in my 
room where the table was. 

" My brother was several years older than myself, and I was extremely 
attached to him ; he was accustomed to my doing this sort of thing for 
him by day. 

"This happened at Salehurst Vicarage, in Sussex, two months before 
my father came here. I never spoke of it to them until this week, when 
I told my brothers and sisters." 

The following is the enclosure mentioned : 

"May 21st, 1884. 

" I remember well the event you allude to, of how you awoke one 
night, calling for Herbert, and I went into your room, found you crying, 
and tried to comfort you. I have often thought of it since. 

"EMILY C. O." 

In answer to inquiries, Miss K. A. O. says : 

" You ask if this experience was unique in my brother's case, and I 
believe it to be so. He would have treated anything of the kind merely 
as a joke, and the idea that such a thing as thought-transference was 
possible would never have crossed his mind. Nothing that I had done 
before could have made him expect me at night, for I had never done 
any night nursing, and he himself scolded me for what he imagined the 
imprudence of my proceeding. If I had been in the habit of going to his 
room, then I should have gone at once when I felt he wanted me, but as I 


had never done so, I was afraid of alarming him by going in at night. I 
have never had any similar experience." 

This case resembles No. 271 above, in the point that the " agency" 
was apparently exercised at the moment of startled waking from 
sleep ; but considering the circumstances, the present coincidence 
could more easily than the other be regarded as accidental. Had the 
brother's experience been a dream, or even a vision between sleeping 
and waking, we should feel that to be the reasonable view. There is 
one feature in the account, no doubt, which looks very like dreaming 
the brother's remark, " You gave me my drops." But it will be 
observed that this is not mentioned in the entry in the note-book ; 
it seems therefore very probable that it was an unconscious addition 
on Miss O.'s part. On the other side we have her brother's recorded 
testimony that the phantasmal visit took place at a time when 
he was " very wakeful " ; and it would be at least noteworthy 
that he should have had what we are led to suppose was the one 
waking hallucination of his life, at the very time that his sister was 
also experiencing a unique and closely corresponding impression. 

3. The next case is of a rarer type ; as, though the senses of sight 
and hearing were both affected, the two impressions were not 
combined in the same incident, but were separated by several hours 
interval. The account is from Mr. Garling, of 12, Westbourne 
Gardens, Folkestone, a witness as free from credulity and superstitious 
fancies as can well be imagined. 

"February, 1883. 

(302) " One Thursday evening, about the middle of August in 1849, 1 
went, as I often did, to pass the evening with the Rev. Harrison and his 
family, with whom I had for many years lived on terms of the closest 
intimacy. The weather being very fine, we made up a party with the 
neighbours, and went to the Surrey Zoological Gardens, and spent the 
evening there. I note this particularly, because it proves that he and his 
family were in good health incontestably on that day, and that no 
suspicion of what was to follow so soon existed with anyone. The next 
day I went down on a visit to some relatives in Hertfordshire, who lived 
at a house called Flamstead Lodge, about 26 miles from London, on the 
high road. We usually dined at 2 o'clock, and on Monday afternoon 
following, after their early dinner, I left the ladies in the drawing-room, - 
and sauntered through the paddock down to the high road. You will 
note the time was in the middle of a sunny August day, in a wide, public, 
commonplace high road, not a hundred yards from a roadside public-house 
I myself in a perfectly cheerful, healthy frame of mind no surroundings 
of any kind to excite the imagination, some country people not far off, 


indeed, at the time I speak of. Suddenly a ' phantom ' stood before me, so 
close that had it been a human being it must have touched me ; blotting 
out for a moment the landscape and surrounding objects ; itself indistinct 
in outline, but with lips that seemed to move and murmur something, 
and with eyes fearfully distinct that fixed and followed and glared into 
mine, with a look so intense and deeply earnest that I fairly recoiled from 
the spot and started backwards. I said to myself instinctively and 
probably uttered it aloud, ' Good God, it is Harrison ! ' though not think- 
ing of him or having reason to think of him in the remotest degree at the 
xnoment. In probably a few seconds, which seemed to me far longer, it 
vanished, leaving me rooted to the spot for a few moments, and sensible 
of the reality of the vision by the curious physical effect it left upon me. 
This was as if the blood was like ice in my veins ; x no flutter of the 
nerves, but a deadly chill feeling that lasted more or less for nearly an 
hour, and only gradually wore off as the circulation returned. I have 
never felt any similar sensation before or since. I said nothing to the 
ladies when I returned, as I should have frightened them out of their wits, 
and the impression made upon me gradually became fainter as the day 
wore out. 

" I have said that the house was near the high road ; it stood in its 
own grounds by the side of a country lane leading up to the village, 200 or 
300 yards or more from any other habitation, with a seven-foot iron 
railing in front to keep out tramps ; gates always locked at night ; about 
30 feet of hard gravel and paved pathway from front door to lane. A 
beautiful quiet summer evening followed. Placed as the house was, with 
hard gravel and high iron palisade and paving, no one could have 
approached the house in the deep silence of that summer evening without 
being heard a long way off. There was, moreover, a large dog in a kennel, 
placed so as to command the front entrance, especially to warn off 
intruders ; and a little terrier inside that barked at everybody and at 
every noise. We were just retiring to bed, and were sitting in the 
drawing-room, which was on the ground floor, close by the front door, the 
terrier within. The servants had already gone to bed in a room quite at 
the back, 60 feet away. They, when they came down, told us they were 
asleep, and were roused by the noise. Suddenly there came to the front 
door a noise so loud and continuous (the door seeming to shake in the 
frame and to vibrate under some tremendous blows), that we started to 
our feet in amazement, and the servants came in a moment after, half- 
dressed, running downstairs from their room at the back to know what it 
was. We went at once to the door, but could neither hear nor see 
anything or anybody. And the dogs gave no tongue whatever. The 
terrier, contrary to its nature, slunk shivering under the sofa, and would 
not stop even at the door, and nothing could induce him to go into the 
darkness. There was no knocker on the door, nothing to fall down, and 
no possibility of anyone approaching or leaving the house, so situated, in 
that profound silence, without discovery. They were all horribly 
frightened, and I found it very difficult to get them to go to bed, but I 
was myself in so unimpressionable a frame of mind that I did not at the 
time connect it with the ' phantom ' in the afternoon ; but still went to 

1 See p. 37, note. 


bed myself, pondering upon it and seeking some obvious explanation to 
satisfy the members of the household, but without success. 

"I stopped there till Wednesday morning, having no suspicion of what 
had happened in my absence. On that morning I returned to town to my 
chambers, then at No. 11, King's Road, Grays Inn. My clerk met me 
at the door with, ' Sir, a gentleman has been here two or three times ; is 
most anxious to see you ; says he must see you immediately ; he is gone 
out for a few minutes to get a biscuit, and he will be back directly.' In 
a few minutes the gentleman returned, and I recognised at once a Mr. 
Chadwick, also an intimate friend of Harrison and his family. He then 
told me, to my amazement, ' There has been a fearful visitation of cholera 
in the Wandsworth Road,' meaning at Mr. Harrison's ; ' all are gone.' 
Mrs. Rosco was attacked on Friday, and died ; her maid the same evening, 
and died. Mrs. Harrison was attacked on Saturday morning, and died 
that evening. The housemaid died on Sunday. The cook also was taken 
ill, was carried away, and escaped very narrowly. Poor Harrison was 
attacked himself on Sunday night, was fearfully ill all Monday and 
yesterday, and has been taken away from the Pest-house in the Wands- 
worth Road to Jack Straw's Castle at Hampstead, to get into a better 
air ; he was begging and praying for the people about him, all Monday 
and yesterday, to send for you, but nobody knew where you were gone to. 
You must take a cab at once and come with me, or you will not see him 
alive.' I went with Chadwick at once, but he was dead before I reached 
the place. 

" H. B. GARLING." 

The obituary in the Watchman, for August 15th, 1849, shows that Mrs. 
Rosco died from cholera on August 4th, Mrs. Harrison on August 8th, 
and the Rev. T. Harrison on Thursday (not Wednesday), the 9th, at 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Garling says : 

" The ladies were old, and have been dead some 25 years. Of the 
servants at the house all trace has been lost." 

Mr. Garling added a few details, in conversation with the present 
writer. The figure met him on the high road, so close to his face that he 
hardly observed anything in detail except the face. He has had one other 
hallucination, when he seemed to see the figure of a friend at the foot of 
his bed. But the friend was one whose funeral he had just been attending, 
and who, moreover, had been accustomed, in life, to sit where the figure 
was seen ; and Mr. Garling himself was going to sleep at the time. The 
experience, therefore, cannot be argued to show any special proclivity to 
subjective hallucination. 

The auditory experience here is a good specimen of what I have_ 
called the rudimentary type a class of which the inconclusiveness 
has been sufficiently dwelt on. But clearly the presumption that the 
sound was telepathic in origin is strengthened by the fact of the visual 
experience which preceded it. Telepathy having (as we may reason- 


ably suppose) produced the first phenomenon, it is not unreasonable 
to credit it with the second ; especially since the second, though 
it affected so many persons, seems in itself particularly hard to account 
. for by any objective cause in the vicinity. It may appear, no doubt, 
extremely strange that the conditions which first flashed an impression 
to the one person directly interested should afterwards involve, the 
whole household in a psychic storm; but this topic belongs to the 
concluding chapter, on " Collective Cases." 




1. WE have now to consider a quite new type of telepathic action. 
In the classes which have so far been passed in review, whether 
experimental or spontaneous, the parts of the agent and the -per- 
cipient have been well defined, and the current of influence has set 
from the one to the other in an unmistakeable fashion. But in several 
cases, it may be remembered, (especially Nos. 35 and 94,) we have had 
indications that the influence might be a reciprocal one that each 
of the parties might receive a telepathic impulse, from the other, and 
so each be at once agent and percipient. The cases referred to 
were doubtful, because the experience at one end of the line was a 
dream ; and dreams having an almost limitless scope, it was conceivable 
enough that that of Mr. Newnham, for instance, though it curiously 
corresponded with his fiancdes actions and surroundings at the time, 
did so by accident ; and that therefore his mental condition, while it 
affected her, was not affected by her. But had he had a waking vision 
of her, as she had of him, we should have considered it probable that 
the influence was mutual ; since if two rare or unique events, which 
present so obvious a primd facie connection as A's vision of B and 
B's vision of A, fall at the same time, we cannot readily assume the 
coincidence to be accidental. And if there are further and more 
distinct grounds for attributing B's vision to telepathy say because 
A is dying at the time it will be only reasonable to regard A's 
vision as part of the same complex phenomenon, rather than to 
suppose that A has an accidental vision at the same time as B has a 
telepathic one. But of course the proof of a reciprocal influence 
would be stronger still if, at the the time of B's impression of A, A 
expressed in words some piece of knowledge as to B's condition which 
could not have been acquired in a normal manner. We thus see that 
a group of cases which have all the same claim to be considered 


telepathic, may have different claims, ranging from the very doubtful 
to the very conclusive, to be considered reciprocally telepathic. 1 

I will begin with a couple of the more doubtful cases. The 
following account was received through the kindness of Mr. G. J. 
Romanes, F.R.S., who is well acquainted with the narrator. 

" March 18th, 1883. 

(303) " On the night of the 26th of October, 1872, 1 suddenly felt very 
unwell, and went to bed about half-past 9, an hour earlier than usual, and 
fell asleep almost immediately, when I had a very vivid dream, which 
impressed me greatly; so much so, that I remarked to my wife, on 
waking, that I feared we should shortly receive bad news. I imagined 
I was sitting in the drawing-room near a table, reading, when an 
old lady suddenly appeared seated on the opposite side, close to the 
table. She neither spoke nor moved much, but gazed very intently on 
me, and I on her, for at least 20 minutes. I was much struck by her 
appearance, she having white hair, very dark eyebrows, and penetrating 
eyes. I did not recognise her at all, but thought she was a stranger. My 
attention was then directed to the door, which opened, and my aunt 
entering and seeing me and the old lady staring at each other in this 
extraordinary way, with much surprise and in a tone of reproach 
exclaimed, ' John ! don't you know who this is 1 ' and without giving me 
time to reply said, ' Why, this is your ^grandmother,' whereupon my 
ghostly visitor suddenly rose from her chair, embraced me, and vanished. 

1 The numerous cases where two friends in different places prove to have been each 
exceptionally engrossed with the idea of the other at the same moment, must not be put 
forward as instances of telepathic, much less of reciprocal, action ; for we may always 
suppose that the impressions only appeared to have been exceptionally vivid after 
the fact of the coincidence had given them a certain exceptional interest. The undue 
importance often attached to such incidents is to be regretted, since it confuses the subject, 
and to some extent excuses a similar confusion on the part of opponents as, e.g., when an 
eminent man of science thinks telepathy sufficiently refuted by this very consideration, 
that by accident friends sometimes think of one another, and even write to one another, 
simultaneously (Deutsche Rundschau for Jan., 1886, p. 45). Nor will it suffice for the 
exceptional character of one of the impressions to be established beyond doubt. For 
example, Miss Edith Taylor, of 9, Endsleigh Gardens, N.W., tells us of the following 
experience of herself and a friend. 

"June 25th, 1884. 

" I was living at the time in Germany, and my friend in Holland. She had been 
visiting at the house where I was staying, but had returned home some weeks before 
the ' illusion ' occurred. One evening in the autumn of 1880, I was walking alone in the 
garden, trying to learn some German poetry, and not succeeding very well, when I heard 
some one step on to the gravel walk behind me. I then felt the touch of a hand on my 
arm, .and my friend's voice said pretty distinctly, 'Edith, Edith.' I turned round very 
quickly, and I believe I said, ' Why, what is it ? ' I certainly expected to find some one 
behind me, and had a sort of wild idea that it must be my friend, from the curious way in 
which my name was spoken, the foreign accent in the word. Seeing nobody I was fright- 
ened, and went in. In answer to the letter in which I told her what had passed, my 
friend wrote back that it was curious that I should have fancied her so near me just then. 
She had been reading Italian, which we had studied together for a while, and had very 
much wished to speak to me about some passage that had struck her in the lesson. My 
friend had not heard or imagined that she heard me, but she said she felt as if the air 
were full of me." 

Miss Taylor's hallucination was quite unique in her life ; but we cannot tell that her 
friend's thoughts were not pretty constantly directed to her at this period ; and there is, 
therefore, no reason why the coincidence, such as it was, should not have been a pure 


At that moment I awoke. Such was the impression it made on my mind, 
that I got my note-book and made a note of this strange dream, believing 
that it foreboded bad tidings. However, several days passed without 
bringing any dreaded intelligence, when one night I received a letter from 
my father, announcing the rather sudden death of my grandmother, which 
took place on the very night and hour of my dream, half -past 10. 

" About four months after her death, I went to the Isle of Wight, 
where she lived, to get information from my relatives as to what my 
grandmother was really like. My aunt and cousin described her in every 
particular, and their descriptions of her coincided most marvellously with 
the figure and face that appeared to me, the white hair and dark eyebrows 
being a peculiarity in her. This I particularly observed in my dream. I 
learnt, too, that she was extremely fussy in the arrangement of her cap, 
always being anxious that no part, even the strings, should be out of place, 
and curious to relate, I noticed in my dream that she was nervously 
touching her cap strings, now and again, for fear they should be out of 
place. My cousin, who was with her when she died, told me that my 
grandmother had been delirious for some time previous to her departure ; 
and for a moment, when in that state, she suddenly put her arms round 
my cousin's neck, and on opening her eyes and regaining consciousness, she 
said with a look of surprise, ' Oh, Polly, is it you ? I thought it was some 
body else.' This seems to me very curious, as it was just what she did 
before she vanished from me in the drawing-room. I must add that I had 
not seen my grandparent for at least 14 years, and the last time I saw her 
she had dark hair, but this had gradually changed to white, leaving her 
eyebrows dark, and I am positive that nobody ever mentioned this 
peculiarity to me." l " J. H. W." 

Mrs. W. says : 

" July 1st, 1885. 

" I quite remember my husband telling me, on my going to my room on 
the evening of the 26th October, of a remarkable dream he had just 
had, and also his making an entry in the pocket book on the following 

" F. W." 

We find from the Register of Deaths that Jane W. died at the age 
of 72, on Oct. 26, 1870 [see below], at Brixton, Isle of Wight. 

Mr. Podmore says : 

"I called on Mr. J. H. W. to-day (July 4th, 1884), and heard the 
acco'unt from him vivd voce. His cousin's corroboration, for a reason which 
he explained to me, cannot be obtained. But he explained to me that 
he went to see his cousin within three months of the death, and received 
full particulars of the death-scene from her then. I asked him if he stood 
by the phrase ' at least 20 minutes,' pointing out that it was difficult to 
attach any precise meaning to these words ; if they were a correct descrip- 
tion of his impressions, a grotesque incident must have been interpolated" 

1 In respect of this last feature, the case may be classed with those of Chap, xii., 8. 
The nervous fidgeting with the cap-strings may possibly be regarded as a distinctive 
habit, sufficiently deeply organised to be a feature in the person's latent representation of 
her own physique. See the remarks at the end of the section referred to. 


in the midst of an otherwise realistic dream. He maintains that the words 
are correct ; it seemed to him that he and the old lady sat staring at each 
other across the table for a very long time. Mr. W. told me that he 
dreams very little ; and that he has never had another dream which he 
thought worth noting. He has never dreamt of death." 

After a second call, Mr. Podmore writes : 

" I received an account from Mrs. W. of her husband's dream, as she 
remembered to have heard it within an hour of its occurrence and sub- 
sequently, which tallied precisely with the account here given. I saw also 
the note made on the following morning. It occurs at the head of the 
first page of a small pocket sketch-book, the rest of the page being 
occupied with pen or pencil memoranda of accounts, &c. The entry is 
'Odd dream, night of October 26th, 1870.' The last numeral, which 
is very indistinct, is apparently 0. Mr. W., in writing 'his original 
account in March, 1883, had referred to this note and read the final 
numeral as 2. Hence the discrepancy. He has no other memorandum of 
the death. 

" I pressed him as far as I could, but he still declines to give his name, 
fearing that he might acquire the reputation of being ' ghostly ' and 
fanciful, and thus injure his professional prospects." 

Clearly the dream here is far less likely to have been accidental 
than Mr. Newnham's. But the inference from the dying woman's 
words, that she may have been in some way affected with a sense 
of her grandson's presence, is, of course not one that can be pressed. 
And the same remark applies to several cases where A, who is in the 
crisis of illness, professes actually to have seen, as though by some 
clairvoyant flash, an absent relative, B, who turns out to have had 
at the same time a telepathic impression of A; for unless special 
details of B's aspect or surroundings are described, A's alleged per- 
ception of him may always be supposed to have been a mere 
subjective dream or vision, and the percipience is not demonstrably 
reciprocal. l 

The next example from Mr. J. T. Milward Pierce, of Bow Ranche, 
Knox County, Nebraska, U.S.A., stands somewhat apart. 

"Frettons, Danbury, Chelmsford. 

"January 5th, 1885. 

(304) "I live in Nebraska, U.S., where I have a cattle ranche, &c. 
I am engaged to be married to a young lady living in Yankton, Dakota, 
25 miles north. 

"About the end of October, 1884, while trying to catch a horse, I 
was kicked in the face, and only escaped being brained by an inch or two; 

1 For instances of the sort, see cases 245 and 354 ; also 612, and Mrs. Fox's account, 
given in a note to that case. 


as it \yas I had two teeth split and a severe rap on the chest. There were 
several men standing near. I did not faint, nor was I insensible for a 
moment, as I had to get out of the way of the next kick. There was a 
moment's pause before anyone spoke. I was standing leaning against 
the stable wall, when I saw on my left, apparently quite close, the young 
lady I have mentioned. She looked pale. I did not notice what she wore ; 
but I distinctly noticed her eyes, which appeared troubled and anxious. 
There was not merely a face, but the whole form, looking perfectly ma- 
terial and natural. At that moment my bailiff asked me if I was hurt. I 
turned my head to answer him, and when I looked again she had gone. I 
was not much hurt by the horse ; my mind was perfectly clear, for 
directly afterwards I went to my office and drew the plans and prepared 
specifications for a new house, a work which requires a clear and 
concentrated mind. 

" I was so haunted by the appearance that next morning I started for 
Yankton. The first words the young lady said when I met her were, 
' Why, I expected you all yesterday afternoon. I thought I saw you 
looking so pale, and your face all bleeding.' (I may say the injuries had 
made no visible scars.) I was very much struck by this and asked her 
when this was. She said, ' Immediately after lunch.' It was just after 
my lunch that the accident occurred. I took the particulars down at the 
time. I may say that before I went into Yankton, I was afraid that 
something had happened to the young lady. I shall be happy to send you 
any further particulars you may desire. 


In answer to inquiries, Mr. Pierce says : 

" I think the vision lasted as long as a quarter of a minute." He 
has had no other visual hallucination, except that once, when lying shot 
through the jaw by an Indian, he thought he saw an Indian standing over 
him, and infers that it was not a real one, or he would have been scalped. 

Mr. Pierce wrote on May 27th, 1885 : 

" I sent your letter to the lady, but did not get an answer before 
leaving England, and upon arriving here found her very ill, and it is 
only recently I have been able to get the information you wished for. 
She now wishes me to say that she recollects the afternoon in question, 
and remembers expecting me, and being afraid something had happened, 
though it was not my usual day for coming ; but although at the time she 
told me that she saw me with a face bleeding, she does not now appear 
to recollect this, and I have not suggested it, not wishing to prompt her in 
any way." 

In another letter of July 13th, 1885, Mr. Pierce says: 

" I am sorry I can do no better for you than the enclosed letter. The 
fact seems to be that events of absorbing interest, and illness, appear to" 
have driven nearly all remembrance of the incident from Miss MacGregor's 
mind, attaching no particular importance to it at first. I have prompted 
her memory, but she only says, no doubt I am right, but that she can't 
now recollect it." 


The letter enclosed from Miss Macgregor is as follows : 

" Yankton, D.T. 

"July 13th, 1885. 

" I have read the letter you sent to Mr Pierce. I am afraid I cannot 
now recall the time you mention clearly enough to give you any distinct 

" I remember feeling sure some accident had happened, but I told Mr. 
Pierce at the time everything unusual I felt, and events that have since 
occurred have, I am afraid, completely effaced all clear recollections of 
the facts. " ANNIE MACGREGOR." 

Knowing Mr. Pierce, I have no doubt that his recollection of what 
Miss MacGregor told him at the time is substantially accurate, 
and if so, it would be natural to interpret her experience as telepathic. 
But his vision may have been purely subjective. I am not aware, it 
is true, of any precisely parallel case, unless indeed it be Mr. Pierce's 
other experience, with the Indian. In my collection of purely 
subjective cases, I have one from a lady who was troubled by 
hallucinations for some time after a concussion of the brain; but 
the blow which Mr. Pierce received was a comparatively slight one. 
Still, seeing that on the one hand his faculties may have been 
momentarily disordered by it, and that on the other the person whose 
form he saw was in a completely normal state at the time, it is safer 
not to lay stress on the reciprocal aspect of the case. 

2. The remaining cases are, I think, less doubtful. The follow- 
ing account is extracted from the evidence given by the late Mr. 
Cromwell F. Varley, F.R.S., before a Committee of the Dialectical 
Society, on May 25, 1869 (Report, p. 161. Another case of Mr. 
Varley's will be found in Vol. I., p. 288). 

(305) " In a second case my sister-in-law had heart disease. Mrs. Varley 
and I went into the country to see her, as we feared, for the last time. I had 
a nightmare and could not move a muscle. While in this state, I saw the 
spirit 1 of my sister-in-law in the room. I knew that she was confined to 
her bedroom. She said, ' If you do not move you will die ' ; but I could 
not move, and she said, ' If you submit yourself to me, I will frighten you, 
and you will then be able to move.' At first I objected, wishing to 
ascertain more about her spirit-presence. When at last I consented, my 
heart had ceased beating. .1 think at first her efforts to terrify me 
did not succeed, but when she suddenly exclaimed, ' Oh, Cromwell ! I am 
dying,' that frightened me exceedingly, and threw me out of the torpid 
state, and I awoke in the ordinary way. My shouting had aroused Mrs. 
Varley ; we examined the door, and it was still locked and bolted, and I 
told my wife what had happened, having noted the hour, 3.45 a.m., and 

1 See p. 48, note. 


cautioned her not to mention the matter to anybody, but to hear what was 
her sister's version, if she alluded to the subject. In the morning she told 
us that she had passed a dreadful night ; that she had been in our room, 
and greatly troubled on my account, and that I had been nearly dying. It 
was between 3.30 and 4 a.m. when she saw I was in danger. She only 
succeeded in arousing me by exclaiming, ' Oh, Cromwell ! I am dying.' 
I appeared to her to be in a state which otherwise would have ended 

Even this incident might possibly be explained (like case 94) as 
an instance of simultaneous dreams l an independent and original 
nightmare of one of the two parties concerned inducing that of the 
other, without being reciprocally influenced by it. The next case, 
if correctly recorded, could not be so regarded. The account is 
contained in a letter from Mr. T. W. Smith, late of Leslie Lodge, 
Baling, to the Psychological Society, dated February 26th, 1876, and 
kindly lent to us by Mr. F. K. Munton, who was secretary of that 
Society. Mr. Smith, who was known to Prof. Barrett, left Baling 
early in 1877, and his present address cannot be ascertained. 

(306) " I found the lady who is now my wife at a large public institution 
to which I was appointed headmaster, in 1872. On leaving her situation, 
I induced her, for certain reasons, to conceal the fact of our intended 
marriage from those of her friends whom she had left behind at the 
school, and the only way to do this was not to write to any of them. 

" Some six months after our marriage, I was reading in bed, according 
to a habit of mine, my wife asleep at my side, when she awoke suddenly, 

sat up, and exclaimed, in very earnest tones, ' Oh, I have been to .' 

I, of course, treated what she forthwith began to relate to me as a more 
than usually vivid dream, and the next day ceased to think of it. She, 
however, recurred to her dream from time to time, and I remember the 
circumstantial way in which she dwelt upon each point of it, especially a 
peculiar expression which I did not forget, though I made no written note 
of it at the time. Three months later my wife went to visit her mother, 
and found there a letter from one of her friends, urgently entreating 
some one to write and say whether Miss (my wife) was alive or dead. 
I was induced to go and see the writer, and then ascertained the cause of 
her hastily-written and strangely-worded epistle. The two occurrences on 
the s"ame day as well as I could fix the date, for neither of us were quite 
certain as to that essential particular present a coincidence which I have 
never been able satisfactorily to explain on any hypothesis consistent with 
what is at present known of nature's laws. 

" My wife dreamt that she was in a well-remembered room, at the base 
of the building, in company with four females two of whom were old. 
friends and two strangers to her. They were talking and laughing and 
preparing to retire to their several sleeping apartments. She saw one of 
them turn off the gas. She followed them upstairs, entered with two of 

1 See Vol. i., pp. 314-20, and the opening cases in Chap, iii, of the Supplement. 


them into a bedroom, saw ' Bessie ' place some things in a box, undress, 
and get into bed ; then she went to her, took her by the hand, and said, 
' Bessie, let us be friends.' So much for the dream. 

" The writer of the letter gave me this account of what had occasioned 
her writing ; and I need scarcely say that I did not first mention what my 
wife had dreamt, for in that case it might be supposed that I had myself 
assisted in suggesting the remarkable expression, which, in my opinion, 
removes the occurrence from the category of 'remarkable coincidence's.' 
She and her friend, ' Bessie,' had gone to bed one Sunday night', when an 
alarming cry from the latter brought the other to her bedside : ' I have 
just seen ' (my wife) ; ' she touched me and said, " Let us be friends." ' 

" The next day, on discussing the matter, though some of them thought 
that Bessie had been dreaming, and imagined what she declared she saw, 
others thought it a ' sign ' that my wife was dead. And the one who was 
the best scribe amongst them undertook to write to the only address they 
possessed, in order to ascertain the truth. The letter had not been 
forwarded to us because my wife had, it seems, told her mother my wish 
that no communication with her former friends should take place. 

" The odd thing about the dream is that my wife had always been on 
good terms with ' Bessie,' and was so on parting with her. 

" In the foregoing account of the dream, and what I may call its 
complement, I omit many minor points, such as the fact that two new 
comers had taken the place of two former friends of my wife ; that the 
effect on both my wife and Bessie was beyond what any ordinary dream 
would have produced ; and that the two females, whom my wife in her 
dream saw enter the bedroom, did really occupy the same room." 

[It is much to be regretted that we have had no opportunity of ex- 
amining the letter ; l but the correspondence of the two experiences would 
hardly have impressed Mr. Smith as it did, if it had not included a very 
striking detail.] 

1 The importance, in these apparently reciprocal cases, of obtaining independent evi- 
dence from both sides, is well shown in the following example, A lady of good sense, 
occupying a responsible position whose name is suppressed not by her wish, but because 
our view of the case differs considerably from hers wrote to us on November 29, 1884 : 

"In the summer of 1864, I had cause for grave anxiety concerning the moral condi- 
tion of a very dear friend. I knew that W. had formed a connection which, if persisted 
in, would lead to his ruin, present and eternal. On the 30th of August, 1864, I retired to 
rest about half -past 10. As the clock struck 11 my husband was alarmed by my violent 
sobbing, which caused me to awake, on which I exclaimed, ' Oh, husband ! it is all over 
with poor W. I have seen him, in my dream, brought under great temptation by the 
wicked words of that woman. In a passion of tears I implored him to have mercy on 
himself. At first he seemed to hesitate, then, at a sign from her, he motioned me angrily 
away, saying, " I will have none of your restrictions. I have been held back by them too 
long already." With these bitter words I awoke, to find myself bathed in tears.' 

" For three days this vision haunted me with a tenacity I could not shake off. Judge 
then my surprise at receiving the following narrative from W, : 

" 'On the night of August 20th, while sitting smoking my cigar (after 10 p.m.), the 
last person on earth I wished to see was announced. She came forward to me with words 
of bitter reproach, followed by tender persuasion, in the midst of which the door of my 
dining-room again opened, and you appeared, in a long white gown, your hair floating 
over your shoulders. With a wild burst of weeping you implored me not to listen to 
another word she uttered, and when I angrily replied, " I will have none of your restric- 
tions," with a look of anguish unutterable you slowly faded from my sight. Not so the 
impression produced on my mind. I felt God had sent you as my guardian angel, and, 
like one of old, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision. I was saved in a moment 


The evidential weakness of this narrative is, of course, the doubt 
as to the exactitude of the coincidence. Supposing the two experiences 
to have fallen on the same night, we can hardly help connecting 
" Bessie's " impression (which seems to have been a hallucination and 
not a dream) with Mrs. Smith's remarkable vision ; which latter is 
again, apparently, an instance of thought-transference of that extreme 
form which I have described as telepathic clairvoyance. 1 

That this last word is the appropriate one for describing (it is far 
enough of course from explaining) the process appears from other 
examples ; and a glance at the condition of these reciprocal cases 
will show that it would naturally be so. There is, as a rule, no difficulty 
in deciding to which of the -two persons concerned the origin of the 
complex phenomenon should be traced ; since one of the two is 
in a more or less abnormal condition, as compared to the other. In 
Mrs. Smith's case, the abnormality (outwardly at any rate) was nothing 
beyond sleep ; but in other examples it is far more pronounced. If, 
then, it is A who is in the abnormal state dying, or whatever it may 
be we attribute B's vision of him to that state. But we cannot 
inversely attribute A's vision of B to B's state, if B's state is 
completely normal. It may, no doubt, be said that B's state ceases 

of supreme danger, and desire to give God the glory for so evident an interposition on 
my behalf. ' 

"I did not keep the letter, but am absolutely positive of its date and its corroboration 
of the remarkable vision. 

"E. A. A." 
Mrs. A.'s husband corroborates as follows : 

"January 29th, 1885. 

" I can distinctly recollect the night on which my wife had the remarkable dream 
referred to, the particulars of which she related to me directly she awoke. She was 

Esatly excited and much troubled, and repeated several times, ' I hope nothing has 
ppened to W. G.' 

" A day or two afterwards it may have been the second or third day ; of this I am 
uncertain she received a letter from our friend, which I saw and read, and which con- 
firmed in an extraordinary manner the connection with her dream. Mrs. A., I think, 
has already told you the particulars, which I need not enter into further. 

" J. A." 

Now though this account was undoubtedly given in good faith, it contains some very 
suspicious points. The conversational style of interview between the gentleman (whose 
previous excited state naturally marks him as the "agent") and the apparition, finds 
hardly any parallel in our first-hand records ; and it is rendered doubly strange by_ his 
accepting his friend's intrusion at that hour and in that guise-^as a quite natural inci- 
dent. We might surmise that possibly something of a telepathic nature took place ; but 
that it was exactly, or even approximately, what is reported could not be assumed without 
independent corroboration. I therefore .wrote to the gentleman concerned, and asked 
him whether he remembered having ever seen the phantasmal figure of a friend, whose 
visit was apparently intended to warn him at a critical iuncture. He replied : " J 
remember the circumstance you refer to distinctly ; " adding that he was at the time over- 
wrought in body and mind. But on my asking him whether any one else was present at 
the time, and what were the words spoken, he replied, " There was no one present, nor 
any words spoken, to the best of my recollection ; had there been, I don't think I should 
have forgotten. " Clearly a case where there is this amount of discrepancy between the 
two principal witnesses cannot be quoted as evidence. 

1 Compare Mr. Moule's case, Vol. i., p. 110, note. 


to be normal at the moment when A affects him ; and that possibly 
the power to react telepathically on the impression is started by the 
mere fact of receiving it. But the more natural account of the 
matter would surely trace A's impression, no less than B's, to the 
peculiarity of A's state by supposing either that A's power to act 
abnormally in a certain direction has involved an abnormal extension 
of his own susceptibility in the same direction ; or else that some 
independently-caused extension of his own susceptibility has involved 
the power to act abnormally. 1 In either case, his reception of the 
impression would be active rather than passive ; of the sort that partly 
seems (as I tried to express it before) like the momentary using of 
B's faculties although B's state is not now, as in the former 
clairvoyant pictures and dreams, 2 supplying any exceptional tele- 
pathic stimulus. Still, though A's percipience may not be conditioned 
by B's state, it must, I conceive, be conditioned by B's existence and 
relation to A ; and the distinction again stands clear between 
telepathic clairvoyance, and that alleged independent clairvoyance 
where what is discerned cannot be traced in any natural way to the 
contents of any other human mind. 

The next example is from the Hon. Mrs. Parker, of 60, Elm Park 
Gardens, S.W., who wrote to us on May 24th, 1883 : 

(307) " The following experience happened in the month of November, 
1877, in Regency Square, Brighton. My husband [since deceased] was 
undergoing a course of magnetism from Mr. L., an American. The 
treatment consisted of rubbing by mesmeric passes down the back and 
arms and legs, but in all this there was no intention of putting my husband 
to sleep. The passes were intended to give strength. Mr. L. called 
himself, I believe, a professional mesmerist, but at the time we employed 
him he was not practising as such. He had come to Brighton for rest. 

" After the treatment my husband was in the habit of sitting, for some 
hours, in his wheel-chair, at the top of the Square garden, and on the day 

1 This latter hypothesis seems specially applicable to cases where A's condition has 
been one of mere sleep or trance, and not abnormal in any more serious way. For, con- 
sidering that nearly all the evidence that exists for the reality of clairvoyance goes 
further to show that sleep and trance are the conditions most favourable to it, we should 
certainly rather conceive that what enables A to affect B is the clairvoyant perception 
itself of B or B's surroundings, than that this perception is a secondary result, dependent 
on the fact that A has impressed B by dint merely of being asleep or entranced. Case 
271, above, may possibly be an instance of what is meant. We should naturally expect that 
where the conditions are much the same on both sides, A's and B's parts in the 
phenomenon might be exactly equal and parallel each being perceived by the other in the 
other's own environment ; and case 644 seems to be an example of this. 

1 may note here that the evidence for a heightening of telepathic susceptibility at the 
time of death, and in seasons of illness, is not confined to the class of cases now in 
question. See for instance cases 126, 147, 167, 303, 308, 311, 416 ; and the opening 
cases of Chap. ii. of the Supplement, which are of the more ordinary thought-transference 

2 Vol. i., pp. 258-67, 338-40, and 368-88. 


of which I am writing he had expressed a wish to stay out rather later 
than usual. I went into the house for luncheon, leaving him alone, but 
on looking out of the window a little later, at 2 o'clock, I saw a man 
standing in front of his chair, and apparently talking to him. I wondered 
who it was, and concluded it must be a stranger, as I did not recognise the 
figure, or the wide-awake hat and rather oddly-cut Inverness cape which 
he wore. However, as it very often happened that strangers did stop and 
speak to him, I was not surprised. I turned away my eyes for a moment, 
and when I again looked up the garden, the man had disappeared. I could 
not see him leaving the garden by any of the numerous gates, and remarked 
to myself how very quickly he must have walked to be so soon out of sight. 
Regency Square does not possess a tree and scarcely a shrub, so that there 
was nothing to impede my view. 

" When my husband came in a little later, I said to him, carelessly, 
* Oh, who was that talking to you in the square just now ? ' 

" He replied, ' No one has spoken to me since you left. No one has 
even passed near me.' 

" ' But I saw a man standing in front of you and as I thought 
talking to you about a quarter-of-an-hour ago. His dress was so odd, I 
couldn't at all tell who it could be.' 

" At this my husband laughed, saying, ' I should think not, for there 
was no one to recognise. I assure you not a soul has been near me since 
you left.' 

" ' Have you been asleep ? ' I asked, though I did not think it very 
likely. He assured me he had not. So the subject dropped ; still in my 
own mind I knew I had seen the mysterious figure. 

" Two days afterwards, Mr. L., after giving my husband his treatment, 
came, as was his usual habit, to speak to me before leaving the house. 
After a few words and directions, he said, ' It is a very odd thing, but the 
same experience has happened to me twice since I have attended your 
husband, that, when in quite another place, I have suddenly felt as 
if I were standing by his side, either in your drawing-room or out there in 
the garden.' 

" I looked at him, and for the first time noticed his overcoat which he 
had put on before coming into the room, and the wide-awake in his hand. 
It struck me that these articles were very similar to those worn by the 
figure I had seen, and that in every way Mr. L. resembled this same 
figure. I asked him when, and at what time, he had had the last 
experience spoken of? 'The day before yesterday,' was the reply. 'I 
had just finished an early dinner, and was sitting in front of the fire 
with a newspaper. It was about 2 o'clock ; I remember the time 
perfectly. Suddenly I felt I was no longer there, but standing near 
your husband in the Square garden.' 

" I then told him of the figure I had seen at the same time and place, 
and how I now recognised it to be his. Afterwards I asked my husband 
if he had mentioned the circumstance to Mr. L., but he had not done so, 
and had indeed forgotten all about it. My husband was the only person 
to whom I had mentioned the fact of my vision. It could not by any 
possibility have got round to Mr. L. AUGUSTA PARKER." 

[In answer to the inquiry whether she had ever had any other halluci- 

VOL. II. M 2 


nation of the senses,' Mrs. Parker replied that she had had one other. It 
seems likely, however, that this was merely a. case of mistaken identity, 
the figure being seen at the end of a long hotel-passage ; and this was her 
own impression at the time.] 

This case again seems difficult to explain except on the reciprocal 
theory. It is true that there is not the same proof in the case of Mr. 
L. as in that of Mrs. Smith above, that the scene which he saw was 
transferred, and not spontaneously pictured ; for the place was 
familiar to him, and no unusual details are mentioned. But, on the 
other hand, his experience seems to have been quite unlike an 
ordinary dream ; its very unusualness is what allows us to connect it 
with Mrs. Parker's simultaneous and unique vision ; and if we may 
regard it as having been conditioned by the presence in the per- 
ceived scene of his patient, Mr. Parker who forms, so to speak, the 
pivot of the case the fact that Mr. Parker himself was not con- 
sciously affected can still be accounted for on the analogy of such 
instances as Nos. 242 and 35 5. 1 

The next case was one of collective percipience ; but its best 
place is in the present chapter. The full names of the persons con- 
cerned may be mentioned, but not printed. Mrs. S., one of the 

percipients, writes : 

"April, 1883. 

(308) " A and B 2 are two villages in Norfolk, distant about five miles 
from each other. At the time of the occurrence about to be related, the 
clergymen of these parishes both bore the same name, though there was no 
relationship between them ; at the same time there was a great friendship 
between the two families. On the 20th February, 1870, a daughter, 
Constance, about 14 years old, of the clergyman of A, was staying with 
the other family a daughter, Margaret, in that family, being her great 
friend. Edward W., the eldest son of the Rector of A, was at that time 
lying dangerously ill at home with inflammation of the lungs, and was 
frequently delirious. On the day mentioned, at about noon, Margaret and 
Constance were in the garden of B Rectory, running down a path which 
was separated by a hedge from an orchard adjoining ; they distinctly heard 
themselves called twice, apparently from the orchard, thus : ' Connie, 
Margaret Connie, Margaret.' They stopped, but could see no one, and 
so went to the house, a distance of about 40 yards, concluding that one of 
Margaret's brothers had called them from there. But to their surprise they 

1 I should further conjecture one of the conditions of Mrs. Parker's percipience to 
have been the fact that she was actually contemplating the scene in which Mr. S. seemed 
to find himself (see pp. 267-9). 

2 These letters are substituted for those actually given for the sake of clearness. The 
names of the villages were not suppressed in the accounts that follow ; but as they were 
suppressed in this first one, it has been thought right to suppress them throughout. 


found that this was not the case; and Mrs. W., Margaret's mother, assured 
the girls no one had called them from the house, and they therefore con- 
cluded they must have been mistaken in supposing they had heard their 
names repeated. This appeared to be the only explanation of the matter, 
and nothing more was thought of it. 

"That evening Constance returned to her home at A. On the follow- 
ing day, Mrs. W. drove over to inquire for the sick boy Edward. In the 
course of conversation, his mother said that the day before he had been 
delirious, and had spoken of Constance and Margaret, that he had called 
to them in his ' delirium, and had then said, ' Now I see them running 
along the hedge, but directly I call them they run towards the house.' 
Mrs. W., of B, at once called to mind the mystery of the previous day, 
and asked, ' Do you know at what time that happened ? ' Edward's mother 
replied that it was at a few minutes past 12, for she had just given the 
invalid his medicine, 12 being his hou'r for taking, it. So these words 
were spoken by Edward at the same time at which the two girls had heard 
themselves called, and thus only could the voice from the 'orchard be 
accounted for. 

"M. K. S." 

(The " Margaret " of the narrative.) 

The following statement is from Mrs. R., the " Constance " of the 

"Sept. 1884. 

" Margaret and I were walking in some fields at B., away from the 
road, but not very far from the house. Here I heard a voice call ' Connie 
and Margaret ' clearly and distinctly. I should not have identified it with 
Ted's voice [i.e., her brother's at A.], for we thought it was one of the B 
brothers at the time, till we found no one had called us. I remember that 
it was before early dinner, and that I was expecting to be fetched home that 
same morning, because of Ted's illness ; and that Mrs. W. thought of ask- 
ing mother if Ted had mentioned our names in any way, before she told 
her of what had passed at B. I ought to add that an explanation of the 
story might be found in the conduct of some B plough-boy, playing a trick 
upon us. The situation was such that he might easily have kept out of 
sight behind a hedge. {( ^ E -^ 

Mr. Podmore says : 

"November 26th, 1883. 

" I saw Mrs. R. yesterday. She told me that they recognised the 
voice .vaguely as a well-known one at the time. She thinks that the 
coincidence in time was quite exact, because Mrs. W. of B made a 
note of the circumstance immediately. Her brother an old school-fellow 
of mine cannot recollect the incident at all." 

[If a written note was made, the girls' experience must have seemed 
odder than the " nothing more was thought of it " in Mrs. S.'s account 
would imply.] 

Mrs. W. of A says : 

" My son was about 17 years old. He had had fever and inflamma- 
tion, and was weakened by illness. It was about 12 o'clock. I was 
sitting with him, after his washing and dressing, and he seemed quiet and 


sleepy, but not asleep. He suddenly sprang forward, pointed his finger, 
with arms outstretched, and called out in a voice the loudness of which 
astonished me, ' Connie and Margaret ! ' with a stress on each name, ' near 
the hedge,' looked wildly at them, and then sank down, tired. I 
thought it odd at the time, but, considering it a sort of dream, did not 
allude to it. The next day, Mrs. W. called with Connie and Margaret, 
and said the girls had heard their names called; had run home ; were 
walking by a hedge in their field, had found no one had called them 
from B Rectory. The voice sounded familiar, but as far as I can 
remember my daughter will say it was not distinctly thought to be 
Edward's. I at once told my story, as it was too striking not to be 
named. They said it was about 12 o'clock. Though he was constantly 
delirious in the evening, when the pulse rose, he was never so in the middle 
of the day, and there was no appearance of his being so at the time this 

M. A. W." 
Mrs. W. of B says : 

"August, 1884. 

" Connie was staying with us on account of the illness of her brother 
Edward, and had with Margaret been reading with me one morning. 
At about 11.30 they went into the garden to play (they were girls of 
about 13 and 14), and in half an hour came up to the window to know 
what I wanted. I said 'Nothing,' and that I had not called them, 
though they had heard both their names called repeatedly. I asked them 
where they were when they heard it, and they said in the next walk 
which, you will remember, is formed on one side by the orchard hedge. 
Margaret said directly, ' There, Connie ; I said it was not mother's, but a 
boy's voice.' Then I turned to look at the clock for we had some boys 
as pupils then and I said, ' It would not be one of the boys, for they are 
not out of the study ; it is now 12 o'clock, and I hear them coming out.' 

" I was to take Connie home that afternoon, 1 and, on arriving, of course 
my first question was, ' How was Edward V Mrs. W. told me that he had 
not been so well, and had been very delirious. She said that morning he 
had been calling, ' Margaret ! Connie ! Margaret ! Connie ! Oh, they are 
running by a hedge, and won't listen to me.' I did not say what had 
happened at home, but asked if she knew at what time this had so 
distressed him. She said ' Yes ; ' for she had looked at the clock, hoping 
it was nearly time to give him his medicine, which always quieted him, and 
was thankful to find it was just 12 o'clock." 

Here we seem to have, on the part of the two girls, a telepathic 
hallucination, reproducing the exact words that were in the mouth 
and ear of the sick boy ; and, on his part, a vision reflected from 
their minds, and once more illustrating how what might be described 
as clairvoyance may be a true variety of thought-transference. The 
suggestion at the end of Mrs. R.'s account must not be over- 

1 The other accounts make it probable that it was not till next day that Mrs. W. of 
B went to A. 


looked; but I should be glad to know of precedents for hidden 
plough-boys calling out the Christian names of clergymen's daughters 
and their friends. Nor do I quite see how such a freak could merit 
the designation of a " trick " ; it would surely be a mere piece of 
aimless and pointless rudeness unless, indeed the plough-boy was 
enjoying a telepathic chuckle at the idea that his cry might be 
confounded with another, which was being simultaneously uttered 
five miles off. 

It will be seen that the number of these reciprocal cases (even 
with the addition of those in the Supplement) is small so small that 
the genuineness of the type might fairly enough be called in question. 
There is some danger that our view of the rarer telepathic phenomena 
may be unduly affected by the sense of certainty that gradually and 
reasonably forms with regard to the broad fact of telepathy itself. 
The argument for the reality of telepathy, we must remember, 
depends on a mass of narratives so large as to make a universal error 
in the essential point of all or nearly all of them exceedingly 
improbable ; and is not available in respect of peculiar features, which 
are present in only a very small proportion of the alleged cases. For 
these, the various possibilities of error so fully discussed in the general 
sketch of the evidence (Vol. I., Chap. IV.) may seem quite sufficient 
to account ; and the greater the theoretic interest of the peculiarities, 
the more jealously must their evidential claims be scrutinised. As to 
reciprocality, the reader will form his own opinion. That the 
examples should be few, as compared with those of the simpler 
telepathic types, cannot at this stage of our inquiry seem unnatural. 
For if, amid all the apparent opportunities that human lives present, 
the unknown and probably transient conditions of telepathic perci- 
pience and of telepathic agency only occasionally chance to coincide, 
so as to produce a telepathic phenomenon at all (pp. 77-8) ; and if, of 
the two, the conditions of percipience are the rarer, as experimental 
thought-transference would lead us to suppose ; then the complete 
conditions of a reciprocal case must be rare among the rare. Still, if 
they have occurred, they will occur again. If my colleagues and I are 
right in supposing the type to be a genuine one, we ought to obtain, 
as time goes on, some more well-attested specimens of it ; and to this, 
we look forward with considerable confidence. 




1. THE telepathic cases quoted in the foregoing chapters have almost 
all affected a single percipient only ; and the fact that sometimes the 
percipient was in company at the time, and that his sensory 
experience was unshared by any one present, 1 has confirmed the view 
(to which all other considerations seemed to converge) that telepathic 
affections of the senses are in the most literal sense hallucinations. 
But we have already encountered a few cases where the senses of 
more than one percipient have been affected ; 2 and what awaits us in 
the present chapter is the discussion and complete illustration of this 
perplexing feature. 

Of course the first view which is suggested by the fact that two 
or more people have seen or heard the same thing at the same 
time is that the sight or sound, however abnormal and unaccountable, 
was due to some objective reality within the range of their sense- 
organs in other words, that it was not a hallucination at all. 3 
Hence those apparently telepathic instances where a sensory 
experience, representative of some absent person, has been shared by 
more than one percipient, would imply the immediate presence of 
some sort of physical wraith, or at any rate of an objective human 

I scarcely know how far the idea of a literal wraith is seriously 
entertained by any educated person in the present day. Gaseous 
and vaporous ghosts are, I imagine, quite at a discount ; but the 
word " ether " seems sometimes to be used as a way out of the 

1 See the list of cases given in p. 105, second note. 

2 Nos. 14, 36, 169, 254 (first incident), 258, 264, 279, 302 (second incident), 308 ; case 
166 is a possible instance. See also the dream-cases 127 and 144. 

3 It was in this occasional feature of collective percipience that Falck, in 1692, found 
the strongest argument for the production of hallucinations by an external and daemonic 
power. See p. 72 of his able and elaborate dissertation against Hobbes and Spinoza, in 
DC Dcmonologid recentiorum Autorum. 


difficulty. For many ears the word has, no doubt, a convenient 
vagueness ; but, in fact, we know of no mode by which ether can 
affect s the retina, except through waves started by luminous sub- 
stances of known type. And even if etherial ghosts could be seen, 
the auditory phenomena would remain a hopeless obstacle to a 
satisfactory physical explanation of them. For even the assumption 
of some tenuous and elusive form of matter, which somehow hangs 
about in relation to the mysterious ether, seems less desperate 
than the assumption that such a tenuous presence could move the 
air in the infinitely complex vibration-patterns which correspond 
to speech or music that is to say, could produce at will an effect 
of inconceivable difficulty and complexity on certain gross elements 
of the known material world. 

As to the notion of an objective presence which may affect the 
perceptive faculty of several persons without producing changes in 
the external world, one sort of case is conceivable which would no 
doubt favour it e.g., if two persons, situated at some distance from 
one another, saw the appearance in the respective relations of dis- 
tance and posture which a real object of the same kind would bear 
to them one of them, it might be, seeing a full face, and the other 
a profile. But I know of no examples of this sort. And as a mere 
theory, the notion in question may be left with a single general 
comment ; for though our path skirts, it had better not enter, the 
metaphysical labyrinth suggested by the words " objective reality." 
Let it be conceded then that, where there is a consensus of percep- 
tion, it becomes a nice question for Idealism to determine how 
far, or in what sense, the percept lacks an objective basis. To put an 
extreme case suppose all the seeing world, save one individual, had 
a visual percept, the object of which nevertheless eluded all physical 
tests : would the solitary individual be justified in saying that all 
the others were victims of a subjective delusion ? and if he said so, 
would they agree with him ? But then in this case, or in a less 
extreme one of the same kind, we might at any rate ask one of the 
perceivers to tell us what meaning he can attach to the objectivity 
of his percept, beyond that it has its existence in other minds besides 
his own. If he fails to supply us with any further meaning, on 
him surely lies the onus of proving that the conditions of the 
percept lie outside the perceiving minds ; and if no proof be forth- 
coming, I then see no definite way of distinguishing this " objective " 
view of " collective hallucinations " from the view to be considered 


immediately, which regards the community of percipience as a form 
of thought-transference. 1 

" But " some objectors may say "the question has been begged 
by assuming that the collective percept eludes physical tests. True, 
apparitions have not yet been subjected to spectroscopic analysis, nor 
have phantasmal remarks been recorded by the phonograph ; but 
suppose that the form of a dying person not only appears, but opens 
the door or the window, and the door or the window remains open, 
thus affording to the muscles of the servant who closes it a test of a 
physical change in the external world what account is to be given 
of this ? " Now clearly such phenomena, even if established, would 
afford no convincing analogy by which to judge of cases where no 
similar physical tests are included. But, as a matter of fact, no 
records of the sort that we have met with have reached the evi- 
dential standard which would entitle them to a place in this book 
(see Vol. I., p. 165) ; and until they are established by irrefragable 
evidence, there is another analogy which has in every way a prior 
claim namely, the facts of telepathy as so far set forth. Cannot 
our further facts be explained without going beyond the purely 
psychical transference for which we believe that we have ample 
evidence ? 

Let us see in what ways a theory of purely psychical impres- 
sions could cover the phenomena of collective hallucination. Two 
possible views of what may happen present themselves. The first of 
these would apply only to veridical cases cases which are "telepathic" 
in the literal sense. On this view the simultaneous experiences would 
be traced to a cause external to the percipients ; but this cause would 
not be a real object within the range of the percipients' senses, but a 
real condition of an absent person. A, who is passing through some 
crisis at a distance, produces a simultaneous telepathic impression on 
the minds of B and of C, who happen to be together; both B and C 
project this impression as a hallucination of the senses, in the way 
that has been so fully considered ; and the hallucinations more or less 
nearly resemble each other. 

The second view would apply equally to the cases which are, and 
to those which are not, telepathic, in this literal sense of relating to a 

1 A psychical condition outside the perceiving minds might, no doubt, be found in 
"disembodied intelligence." For the present, it is enough to remark that this change 
of " agency " to some further mind would leave the nature of the phenomenon unchanged. 
Experience thus caused may be called objective, if we will, but it is still thought- 
transference ; just as in Berkeley's view the whole objective universe was only thought- 
transference in excelsis. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 171 

distant agent. The view is that the hallucination of one percipient, 
however caused, begets that of the other, by a process of thought- 
transference ; the hallucination is in itself, so to speak, infectious. B 
and C are together, and B has a hallucination it may be veridical and 
due to a telepathic impression from the distant A, or it may be non- 
veridical and due to a spontaneous pathological disturbance of B's 
own brain ; and this experience of B's is then communicated to C, 
whose brain follows suit and projects a kindred image. The process 
in fact would strongly recall those cases of simultaneous dreaming 
where one dream may be regarded as the cause of the other. 1 It 
would be a fresh example of the psychological identity between the 
sleeping and the waking hallucinations on which so much stress has 
already been laid. 

Such are the two possible views ; and we have now to decide how 
far either, or both, may be reasonably entertained. I may state at 
once that in my opinion the best solution that the problem at present 
admits of involves a certain combination of the two (see 7 below) ; 
but I shall consult clearness by first considering each of them 

2. First, then, as regards the theory of the simultaneous origi- 
nation of two or more hallucinations by a distant agent we 
certainly know of no reason why a state of the agent which is 
telepathically effective at all, should be bound to confine its effects 
to a single percipient. That it generally does so confine them, 
may be easily explained by supposing a special susceptibility on the 
percipient's part, or a special rapport between him and the agent ; 
but that occasionally the impression should extend to others, 
who have also been sympathetically related to the agent, may 
seem no very astounding fact. Now if the impression were a 
merely inward experience, an impression of a merely ideal or 
emo.tional kind, and did not give rise to actual hallucination, 
this account of the matter might be plausible enough : it would 
apply for instance to Mr. H. S. Thompson's case, Vol. I., p. 99. But it 
will be remembered that we have seen reason to regard the 
hallucination as distinctively the percipient's work as something 
projected by him under a telepathic stimulus ; and we have found these* 
sensory projections to take various forms according to the projector's 
idiosyncrasies. We have found, moreover, that the time during 

1 Vol. i., pp. 314-20, and the opening cases in Chap. iii. of the Supplement. 


which such hallucinations may take place extends over several hours 
that we cannot name an exact moment at which the telepathic 
message will reach consciousness, or externalise itself to the sense. It 
becomes, then, extremely improbable that two or more persons should 
independently invest their respective telepathic impressions, at the 
same moment, with the same sensory form ; that they should all at 
once see the same figure, or hear the same sound, in apparently the 
same place. We should expect to find one of them embodying it in 
sound, and another, perhaps half an hour later, in visible shape ; or 
one of them embodying it in sound or shape, and another only 
conscious of it as an inward idea ; and so on. And for divergences 
of this sort, the evidence, though it exists, is small in amount. 

But this is not all. On the theory that joint telepathic hallucina- 
tions are all exclusively and directly due to a distant agent, there is 
one thing that we should not expect to happen, and one thing that 
we should expect to happen. (1) We should not expect the group of 
percipients to include anyone who was a stranger to the agent ; or 
who was not personally in such relations with the agent as would 
have rendered it natural for him, had he chanced to be alone at the 
time, to suffer the same telepathic experience. Nevertheless, cases 
exist where such an outside person has shared in the perception. 
And (2) we should expect that in a fair proportion of cases two or more 
percipients would share the perception, though they were not in each 
other's company at the time. For on the theory that is being 
considered, there would be no virtue in the mere local proximity of 
the percipients to one another ; the agent is supposed to affect them 
by dint of his respective relations to each of them, which have 
nothing to do with their being together or apart. Now, in point of 
fact, we have a group of cases where the persons jointly affected have 
been apart, but they are disproportionately rare in comparison with 
the experiences shared by percipients who have been together; 
and in several of them, moreover, B and C, the two percipients, were 
near each other, and had been to some extent sharing the same life 
conditions which may have had their share in the effect (see 
pp. 266-8). However, the existence of this type might no doubt 
be regarded as an argument for the occasional production ab extra 
of several similar and simultaneous hallucinations ; and our few 
specimens may conveniently be cited at once. 

I have already given (Vol. I., pp. 362-3) a case where two vivid 
dreams of a quite unexpected death were dreamt by persons who 


were in the same house, but not in the same room. The following 
is a somewhat similar instance, but only one of the experiences was a 
dream. Mrs. Bettany, of 2, Eckington Villas, Ashbourne Grove, 

Dulwich (the narrator of case 20,) writes : 

"June, 1885. 

(309) " On the evening of, I think, March 23rd, 1883, I was seized 
with an unaccountable anxiety about a neighbour, whose name I just 
knew, but with whom I was not on visiting terms. She was a lady who 
appeared to be in very good health. I tried to shake off the feeling, but 
I could not, and after a sleepless night, in which I constantly thought 
of her as dying, I decided to send a servant to the house to ask if all 
were well. The answer I received was, ' Mrs. J. died last night.' 

" Her daughter afterwards told me that the mother had startled her 
by saying, ' Mrs. Bettany knows I shall die.' 

" I had never felt an interest in the lady before that memorable 
night. After the death, the family left the neighbourhood, and I have 
not seen any of them since. 


We find from the Register of Deaths that Mrs. J. died on March 23, 

The following is the evidence of the servant who was sent to 
inquire : 

"January, 1886. 

" I remember Mrs. Bettany sending me to inquire if all were well at 
Mrs. J.'s. The answer they gave me was that Mrs. J. was dead. Mrs. 
Bettany sent me to inquire, because she had a presentiment that Mrs. J. 
was dead or dying." 

Mrs. Bettany adds : 

" My cook, to whom I had not mentioned my presentiment, remarked 
to me on the same morning : 'I have had such a horrible dream about 
Mrs. J., I think she must be going to die.' She distinctly remembers that 
some one (she does not know who, and I think never did) told her in her 
dream that Mrs. J. was dead." 

The following is the first-hand evidence to the dream : 

"January llth, 1886. 

" I remember that some one in my dream said ' Mrs. J. is dead.' I do 
not remember the rest of the dream, but I know it was horrible. I 
told Mrs. Bettany at the time, and she then told me about her presentiment 
about Mrs. J. 

[M. Went has occasionally dreamt of the deaths of people she knows, 
without any correspondence.] 

This case would seem to have been in some way "reciprocal"; 
and it is unfortunate that we cannot obtain further details of the 
dying woman's impression. 


The next is a waking and sensory example of the same kind. It 
was first obtained in writing from Mrs. Fagan, of Bovey Tracey, 
Newton Abbot, the mother of one of the percipients ; and her 
account exemplifies the inaccuracies which second-hand evidence may 
sometimes introduce, without really affecting the case in any vital 


" 1883. 

(310) "While the Rev. C. C. T. Fagan [Mrs. Fagan's son], then 
Chaplain of Sealkote, India, was dressing for dinner on Christmas Day 
evening, 1876, his cousin, Christopher 1 Fagan, being similarly employed 
in an adjacent room, both heard the name ' Fagan ' called. The Rev. C. 
C. T. Fagan, though thinking it strange his cousin should thus address him, 
yet knowing no one else was in the house, went to him asking what he 
wanted, why he had not called him 'Charlie ' as usual, and remarking 
that the voice was like that of Captain Clayton, a cavalry officer, who had 
been under his pastoral charge, but was then at a distant station. His 
cousin replied that he too had heard the voice, and probably it was that 
of Major Collis, whom they were expecting to dinner. Upon this they 
adjourned to the drawing-room, where they found the Major, but as he 
had only just come in, he had neither called nor heard the voice. 

" While telling him of what had occurred, they all three heard the same 
voice repeat the same name, and Major Collis remarked, ' It is like 
Clayton's voice.' 

" The next morning a telegram was received to the effect that Captain 
Clayton died at that hour from an accident received while playing at polo." 

Major Collis told our friend, the Rev. A. T. Fryer, of Clerkenwell, 
that Mr. Fagan and his cousin were standing in the doorway of the drawing- 
room talking, when they heard the call, " Fagan." He himself was 
dressing in his room, and they called out to him to know what he wanted ; 
but he had not spoken, nor had he heard the call. Whilst they were talking 
together, the voice came a second time, and all three heard it. 

On being applied to with regard to the discrepancy between these two 
accounts, the Rev. C. C. T. Fagan writes : 

" Sitapur, August 25th, 1883. 

" So far as my memory serves, the statement of Major Collis is 
correct as to the curious coincidence of which he has told you. He was 
certainly staying in my house at the time, and was not a guest merely 
invited to dinner as my cousin was. I cannot now say who suggested 
the voice sounded like that of Captain Clayton. Q. C. T. FAGAN." 

Mr. Fagan says, however, in another letter : "I am under the 
impression that my cousin did not hear the voice." He adds : " At or 
about the time in question, and on more occasions than one, I have 
imagined that I heard people calling me, but, I may add, this experience 
is now seldom or ever happening to me." 

1 By a slip, Mrs. Fagan has called her nephew by her son's name Christopher, instead 
of George. 


Major Collis writes to us on August 2, 1884 : 

" 3, Barton Terrace, Dawlish. 

" In reply to the questions you ask, I have never had experience of 
any other auditory hallucination : neither have I ever had any hallucina- 
tions of the senses whatever. "G. COLLIS." 

Mr. Fagan's cousin, Lieutenant G. Forbes Fagan, of the 10th Lancers, 
writes to us : " 

"Simla, July 31st, 1885. 

" I remember that on the afternoon of the day on which Captain 
Clayton met his death, I was in the Rev. C. Fagan's house at Sealkote ; 
and he said he had heard his mother's voice calling to him, and that 
something was sure to happen. I heard no voice myself. When news 
arrived of Captain Clayton's death, my cousin said the voice must have 
had some connection with it. " G. F. FAGAN." 

In an interview with Mrs. Fagan, Professor Sidgwick learnt that Captain 
Clayton was intimate with the Rev. C. C. T. Fagan, and also knew Major 

The Calcutta Englishman of December 28th, contains a telegram of 
December 26th : " Last evening Captain Clayton, extra aide-de-camp to 
the Viceroy, was thrown while playing polo, and died during the night." 

In answer to a question as to the hour of the accident, Major Lord 
William Beresford writes to us : 

"As well as I remember, it was 6.15 in the evening of Christmas 
Day, 1876, and he died in my arms exactly as the clock struck 12. He 
never spoke after he fell." 

[The somewhat ragged form in which this evidence is presented is due 
to the fact that the Rev. C. C. T. Fagan and Major Collis are understood to 
dislike the subject, and that we have scrupled to press them. But it seems 
quite certain that at a time closely corresponding to that of the accident, two 
percipients, one of whom has never had any other hallucination, heard a 
voice which belonged to no one in their vicinity. As to the immediate 
connection of the voice with Captain Clayton, the evidence is not so clear ; 
but as regards Lieut. Fagan's recollections, we cannot but remark the 
extreme unlikelihood that the two hearers should imagine Mrs. Fagan's 
voice as calling her son by his surname ; and also the unlikelihood that, 
if it was her voice that her son recognised, he should have altered this 
interesting point in the account which he gave her. The case is, of 
course, to some extent weakened by the fact that the Rev. C. C. T. Fagan 
has had other auditory hallucinations. It is worth adding, however, 
that one of these experiences, when he heard his mother's voice urgently 
calling him, proved to have coincided with a very sudden and exceptional 
longing for his presence on her part (Supplement, Chap. VI., 1) ; and 
it may possibly have been the mention of this fact that caused a confusion 
in Lieut. Fagan's memory, and led him to associate Mrs. Fagan with the 
present experience.] 

The following case is part of a record of some singular hypnotic 
experiences, of which some further specimens will be given in 


Chap. I., 3, of the Supplement. Mrs. John Evens, of Oldbank, 

Enniskillen, narrates as follows : 

"December 4th, 1885. 

(311) " With regard to the apparition or optical illusion, I have a perfect 
and clear remembrance. It occurred after the experience related [i.e., 
after a cataleptic fit produced under hypnotic influence]. The operator 
had left me with an earnest request to my husband to send for, or 
fetch him, should anything seem to require it. 

" I was wide awake, and enjoying the freedom from pain ; my room 
being carefully darkened. The operator had, while with me, been 
seated on a chair midway between my bed and a chest of drawers about 
three feet from each. I was thinking very gratefully of the relief I had 
experienced, when I noticed a blueish-white light round the chair. It 
seemed to be nickering and darting in a large oval, but gradually con- 
centrated on a figure seated on the chair. 1 The appearance did not 
startle me in the least ; my first thought was, ' It is Mr. T., a young 
officer with whom we were very intimate, and who had been in the 
house that evening. But the expression of the mouth struck me then, 
and I thought ' Can it be Mr. D. ? ' a dear friend who had died some 
little time before. All this time the face seemed to be changing, and, as 
it were, settling. Suddenly it flashed into my mind ' It is Mr. B.' (the 
father of the operator). I did not know this gentleman at all, except 
from having seen his photograph, but had no doubt on the subject. 
(Curiously enough his mouth and that of. Mr. D.'s were singularly alike 
in expression.) The figure sat in a kind of dim halo. I felt no sur- 
prise ; nor did I speak to it, but thought, ' Oh, you have come to find 
P. (the son) ; he has been here all the evening, but has gone home now.' 
As I thought this the halo gradually diffused itself, as it had before 
become concentrated, and the figure vanished. Besides the distinctness of 
feature, a movement, of crossing and uncrossing the knees two or three 
times, struck me. 

" That same night, and it must have been nearly at the same time, 
the friend who had magnetised me was awoke by hearing his name 
called twice. His impression was that I needed his aid, and he was 
prepared to come (he was living a mile off), if he heard the call repeated. 
But it was not. The next day, when I saw him, without telling him 
any of this, I asked, ' Has your father any noticeable habit or trick of 
movement ? ' At first he said ' No,' and then, ' unless you would 
describe as such a way he has of frequently crossing and uncrossing his 
knees. He has varicose veins, and is restless at times ! ' 

" This was the whole matter. The father, who dislikes such subjects, 
would never say whether he had dreamed or been thinking intently of 
his son ; but probably it was so. " AGNES EVENS." 

In a letter dated 18th December, 1885, Mrs. Evens writes that she 
thinks the occurrence took place in September or October, 1881. She 
has never experienced any other visual hallucination. 

In answer to inquiries, she adds : 

1 As to the oval, see the remarks on case 220 ; as to the gradual appearance and 
gradual disappearance, see Chap, xii., 2 and 3, also above, p. 73, note, and p. 97 ; and 
compare case 315 below. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 177 

(1) "I cannot be sure as to the time at which I saw the appearance, 
but, putting circumstances together, I should think between 12 and 1 
o'clock nearer the latter hour. 

(2) " I am perfectly certain that I uttered no sound ; the phantom's 
disappearance seemed to answer to the thought that passed through my 
mind, ' You want Preston ; he has been here all the evening, but went 
back to Fort Tourgis some time since.' 

(3) " I had not any wish for his presence. I was lying in quiet 
enjoyment of the relief from agonising pain and quivering nerves, in 
which condition one has no active line of thought. I very likely 
thought about him, with a lazy kind of gratitude to him as the author of 
the relief I was experiencing." 

Captain Battersby, R.A., F.R.A.S., of Ordnance House, Enniskillen, 
son-in-law of Mrs. Evens, writes : 

"December 21st, 1885. 

" I had mesmerised Mrs. E. for several months, for severe neuralgia, 
with the view of affording her natural sleep. One night she had been 
in the mesmeric trance, and had been awoke by me, and I had returned 
to barracks situated about half-a-mile from her house leaving her in 
her room. I went to bed, and to sleep, and was awakened with a start 
by hearing my name called very distinctly. I sat up in bed, and 
looked for the caller, but saw no one. It was too dark to look at my 
watch, so that I cannot say what the time may have been. It oc- 
curred to me at the time that Mrs. E. might want me for something. 
I did not recognise the voice, and indeed had no chance of doing so, 
as it did not call again. In the morning I went to see Mrs. E., in 
order to find out whether she had had any unusual experience. She 
asked me if anything had happened to me the night before. I said 
' Yes,' and asked her why she put the question. She said, ' Has your 
father a habit of moving one leg over the other, now and then, in a 
restless way ? ' This was the case. She then said, about 1 a.m. she had 
been roused from sleep, and saw a phosphorescent appearance on the 
chair near her bed, which resolved itself into a human figure, recognised 
by her as my father from a photograph in my possession. It did not 
speak, but seemed to ask her mentally ' Where is Preston ? ' To which 
she responded, also mentally, ' He was here, but is gone home ' ; whereon 
the figure disappeared. I was somewhat alarmed at the occurrence, and 
wrote to ask if my father was well. He was so ; and did not remember 
having any dream of me on that night. Mrs. E. particularly remarked 
his habit of crossing first one leg and then the other, of which I had not 
previously told her. 


In answer to inquiries, Captain Battersby says : 

" I beg to say that at no time, except on the occasion referred to by 
me in my previous letter, have I woke from sleep with the impression of 
having been called In fact this was the only occasion in my life in which 
I heard or saw anything unusual." 

The " collective " character of these two experiences is clearly 
very doubtful ; they may not have been due to any agency on the 



part of Captain Battersby's father, or connected with each other. But 
considering that the accidental coincidence of the two unique ex- 
periences would be most improbable, and that a hypnotic rapport 
probably existed between Captain Battersby and his patient, it is a 
reasonable supposition that his mind was either the source or the 
channel of a telepathic communication to hers. 

The next case was received from Mrs. Poison, of 4, Nouvelle Route 

de Yillefranche, Nice. 

"January, 1884. 

(3 1 2) " Some years since, when living at Woolstone Lodge, Woolstone, 
Berks, of which parish and church, &c., &c., my husband was clerk in 
Holy Orders, I left the fireside family party one evening after tea, to see 
if our German bonne could manage a little wild Cornish girl to prepare 
her school-room for the morning. As I reached the top of the stairs a 
lady passed me who had some time left us. She was in black silk with a 
muslin ' cloud ' over her head and shoulders, but her silk rustled. I could 
just have a glance only of her face. She glided fast and noiselessly (but 
for the silk) past me, and was lost down two steps at the end of a long 
passage that led only into my private boudoir, and had no other exit. I 
had barely exclaimed ' Oh, Caroline,' when I felt she was a something un- 
natural, and rushed down to the drawing-room again, and sinking on my 
knees by my husband's side, fainted, and it was with difficulty I was 
restored to myself again. The next morning, I saw they rather joked me 
at first ; but it afterwards came out that the little nursery girl, while 
cleaning her grate, had been so frightened by the same appearance, ' a lady 
sitting near her, in black, with white all over her head and shoulders, and 
her hands crossed on her bosom,' that nothing would induce her to go 
into the room again ; and they had been afraid to tell me over night of 
this confirmation of the appearance, thinking it would shake my nerves 
still more than it had done. 

" As chance would have it, many of our neighbours called on us the 
next morning Mr. Tufnell, of Uffington, near Faringdon, Archdeacon 
Berens, Mr. Atkins, and others. All seemed most interested, and Mr. 
Tufnell would not be content without rioting down particulars in his own 
pocket-book, and making me promise to write for inquiries that very night, 
for my cousin, Mrs. Henry Gibbs. She had been staying with us some 
time previously for a few days, and I had a letter half written to her in 
the paper case. 

" I wrote immediately to my uncle (the Rev. C. Crawley, of Hartpury, 
near Gloucester,) and aunt, and recounted all that had happened. By 
return of post, ' Caroline is very ill at Belmont ' (their family place 
then), ' and not expected to live ' ; and die she did on the very day or 
evening she paid me that visit. The shock had been over-much for a not 
very strong person, and I was one of the very few members of the 
Crawley or Gibbs family who could not follow the funeral. 


[The three gentlemen whom Mrs. Poison mentions as having been 
immediately informed of her experience, have since died. If the narrative 


should happen to meet the eye of any near relative of the late Rev. G. 
Tufnell, it might perhaps be possible to find out whether the entry in the 
pocket-book is still existing. According to the account, it would appear 
that the Rev. C. Crawley had not heard of the death on the second 
morning after its occurrence. This may seem a little unlikely (as he was 
a relative living at no very great distance), but is still quite possible.] 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Poison adds : 

" I have never before or since suffered from any experience of the 
kind [i.e., had any visual hallucination]. 

" I cannot give you the date, it was so long ago. Still, the past days 
are often present with me, and the scenes of that night are as fresh in 
remembrance as if all had occurred yesterday. 

"I have no idea whatever what became of the Cornish nursery girl. 

" I wrote to my aunt and uncle, near Gloucester, to tell them of what 
had occurred. They replied they had heard Mrs. Gibbs (Caroline) was 
very ill, and the next communication informed us of her departure ; but I 
do not remember whether it took place earlier in the afternoon or later at 
night than when I saw her." 

The following is from the lady who was with Mrs. Poison as governess 
at the time : 

" Clarence Villa, Church Road, Watford. 

"January llth, 1884. 

" I do not in the least object to let you know what I remember of 
the incident you mention. Many years ago Mr. and Mrs. Poison, with 
the children and myself, were sitting one evening in the drawing-room at 
Woolstone. In the middle of the evening Mrs. Poison left the room, but 
soon returned ; remaining silent, I looked up, and saw her drop down on 
the rug fainting. When she recovered, she told us she had seen Mrs. 
Gibbs on before her in the long passage. 

" I recollect hearing that the little Cornish girl said she had seen that 
same apparition while cleaning her grate. As to the date of the incident 
I can only say that, to the best of my recollection, it happened before the 
year 1851. " H. L.MACKENZIE." 

We find from the Times obituary that Mrs. Gibbs died on February 
16, 1850. 

In the next case one of the experiences was emotional, not sensory, 
but was apparently of a very marked sort. The account is from an 
intelligent informant, who has been for many years in the service of 
a family known to the present writer. Neither the witness nor (he 
believes) his mother ever had any other experience of the sort. His 
mother has been dead for some years. 

" 9, Blandford Place, Clarence Gate, Regent's Park. 

"October 21st, 1882. 

(313) "In the winter 1850-51, I, Charles Matthews, was living as 
butler, 25 years of age, with General Morse at Troston Hall, near Bury 
St. Edmunds. My mother, Mary Ann Matthews, was in the same establish- 
ment as cook and housekeeper, a very upright and conscientious woman, 
VOL. n. N 2 


and was much liked by all the servants excepting the ladies' maid, whose 
name was Susan, but her family-name I have forgotten. This Susan 
rendered herself disliked by all in consequence of her tale-bearing and 
mischief -making propensities, but she stood in some awe of my mother, 
whose firmness of character kept her in check to a great extent. 

" Susan fell ill of jaundice, for which she was medically treated for 
some months at Troston Hall, but ultimately was removed to Bury St. 
Edmunds Hospital, and placed in the servants' ward, at General Morse's 
expense, where she died about a week after admission. He used to send 
a woman from the village to the hospital, seven miles distant, to make 
inquiries, on such days as the carriage did not go to Bury St. Edmunds ; 
and on a certain Saturday the woman went, but did not return until the 
Sunday evening, when she said she had found Susan unconscious on her 
arrival, and as death was evidently approaching, she was permitted to 
remain in the ward until the end. 

" During this Saturday night the following mystery occurred, which 
has ever since been a puzzle to myself. Being asleep, I was awakened 
with or by a sudden feeling of terror. I stared through the darkness of 
my bedroom, but could not see anything, but felt overcome by an un- 
natural horror or dread, and covered myself with the bed-clothes, 
regularly scared. My room door was in a narrow passage leading to my 
mother's room, and anyone passing would almost touch my door. I passed 
the remaining portion of the night in restlessness. In the morning I met 
my mother on coming downstairs, and observed that she looked ill and 
pale, and most unusually depressed. I asked ' What's the matter ? ' She 
replied, ' Nothing ; don't ask me.' An hour or two passed, and I still saw 
that something was amiss, and I felt determined to know the cause, and 
my mother seemed equally bent on not satisfying me. At last I said, 
' Has it anything to do with Susan ? ' She burst into tears and said, 
' What makes you ask that question ? ' I then told her of my scare 
during the night, and she then related to me the following 'strange 
story ' : 

" ' I was awakened by the opening of my bedroom door, and saw, to 
my horror, Susan enter in her night-dress. She came straight towards my 
bed, turned down the clothes, and laid herself beside me, and I felt a cold 
chill all down my side where she seemed to touch me. 1 I suppose I fainted, 
as I lost all recollection for some time, and when I came to myself the 
apparition had gone but of one thing I am sure, and that is tlwi it was 
not a dream.' 

" We heard by the village woman on her return the Sunday evening, 
that Susan died in the middle of the night, and that previous to 
becoming unconscious her whole talk was about 'returning to Troston 
Hall.' We had had no apprehension whatever of the death. We thought 
she had gone to the hospital, not because she was in danger, but for the 
sake of special treatment. 

" This is a simple relation of facts, so far as I can state them. I 
myself was not a superstitious or simple fellow, at the time, having seen 
a good deal of the world ; but I have never yet been able to satisfy my 
own mind as to the why or wherefore of the occurrence." 

1 Among transient hallucinations of the sane alike of the purely subjective and of 
the telepathic class affections of three senses are extremely rare (p. 25, note). 


Mr. Matthews tells me that he has never had any similar sensation ; 
and he believes that the hallucination was unique in the experience of 
his mother, who died some years ago. 

In the remaining cases the percipients were much more widely 
separated ; but unfortunately the evidence as to identity of time is 
very far from complete. The following account is from Mrs. Coote, 

of 28, Duke Street, Grosvenor Square, W. 

"July 29th, 1885. 

(314) " On Easter Wednesday, 1872, my sister-in-law, Mrs. W., sailed 
with her husband and three young children from Liverpool in the steamer, 
' Sarmatian,' for Boston, U.S., where they arrived in due course and 
settled. In the following November she was seized with, and died from, 
suppressed small-pox, at that time raging in Boston. About the end of 
November, or the beginning of December in the same year, I was dis- 
turbed one morning before it was light, as near as may be between 5 and 
6 a.m., by the appearance of a tall figure, in a long night-dress, bending 
over the bed. I distinctly recognised this figure to be no other than my 
sister-in-law, Mrs. W., who, as I felt, distinctly touched me. My husband, 
who was beside me asleep at the time, neither saw nor felt anything. 

" This appearance was also made to an aged aunt, residing at this time 
at Theydon Bois, near Epping, Essex. She is now alive, aged over 80 
years, and residing at Hextable, near Dartford, in Kent. She is still in 
full possession of all her faculties. She told my husband as recently as 
the 4th inst., that the appearance came to her in the form of a bright 
light from a dark corner of her bedroom in the early morning. It was 
so distinct that she not only recognised her niece, Mrs. W., but she 
actually noticed the needlework on her long night-dress ! This appearance 
was also made to my husband's half-sister, at that time unmarried, and 
residing at Stanhope Gardens. The last named was the first to receive 
the announcement of the death of Mrs. W., in a letter from the widower 
dated December (day omitted), 1872, from 156, Eighth Street, South 
Boston, still preserved. The death was announced, among other papers 
(as my husband has recently learned), in the Boston Herald. A com- 
parison of dates, as far as they could be made in two of the cases, served 
to show the appearance occurred after the same manner, and about the 
same time, i.e., at the time of, or shortly after, the death of the deceased. 
Neither myself nor the aged Mrs. B., nor my husband's half-sister, have 
experienced any appearance of the kind before or since. It is only 
recently, when my husband applied to his half-sister to hunt up the 
Boston letter, that we learnt for the first time of this third appearance." 

Mr. Coote writes to us as follows : 

" That Mrs. Coote's ' vision ' occurred within a week of the death of 
Mrs. W., in Boston, U.S., is undoubted ; and without any effort to make 
our memories more precise, I may add, that from the first I have always 
thought that the most marked feature in the case was (judging, of course, 
from an opinion formed at the time when the circumstances were fresh in 
my memory) that it occurred within the 24 hours after death. I am 
afraid after this lapse of time that nothing conclusive can be arrived at as 
to ' times ' in the other two cases, beyond the general idea that still 


obtains in the minds of both the aged Mrs. B. and Mrs. , that the 

visions occurred about the same time as that of Mrs. Coote, and after the 
same manner. Mrs. Coote desires me to add that to this hour she has 
never exchanged ideas upon this vision, even with the aged Mrs. B., 
which precludes all possibility of collusion in the matter. 

" C. H. COOTE." 

[It is not possible to obtain a first-hand account of the vision from 
Mr. Coote's half-sister at present.] 

The final example of this type is from Mr. de Guerin, of 98, Sand- 
gate Road, Folkestone, who has had another apparently telepathic 
experience (Vol. I., p. 424). He has had no subjective hallucinations. 

" 1883. 

(315) " The first instance occurred when I was in Shanghai. It was the 
month of May, 1854. The night was very warm, and I was in bed, lying 
on my back, wide awake, contemplating the dangers by which we were 
then surrounded, from a threatened attack by the Chinese. I gradually 
became aware there was something in the room ; it appeared like a thin 
white fog, a misty vapour, 1 hanging about the foot of the bed. Fancying 
it was merely the effect of a moonbeam, I took but little notice, but 
after a few moments I plainly distinguished a figure which I recognised 
as that of my sister Fanny. At first the expression of her face was sad, 
but it changed to a sweet smile, and she bent her head towards me as if 
she recognised me. I was too much fascinated with the appearance to 
speak, although it did not cause me the slightest fear. The vision seemed 
to disappear gradually in the same manner as it came. We afterwards 
learned that on the same day my sister died almost suddenly. I 
immediately wrote a full description of what I had seen to my sister, 
Mrs. Elmslie (the wife of the Consul at Canton), but before it reached 
her, I had received a letter from her, giving me an almost similar 
description of what she had seen the same night, adding, ' I am sure dear 
Fanny is gone.' 

" When I promised that I would send you these particulars I at once 
wrote to my sister, Mrs. Elmslie, and she replies, ' I do not think I was 
awake when Fanny appeared to me, but. I immediately awoke and saw 
her as you describe. I stretched out my arms to her and cried ' Fanny ! 
Fanny ! ' She smiled upon me, as if sorry to leave, then suddenly 

" When this occurred we [i.e., Mr. de Guerin and Mrs. Elmslie] were 
upwards of 1,000 miles apart, and neither of us had a thought of her being 
seriously, much less dangerously ill. Before her death she had spoken of 
us both to those around her bedside. She died in Jersey, on the 30th 
May, 1854, between 10 and 11 at night." 

The Jersey Register of Deaths confirms the date given. 

Mr. de Guerin kindly applied to Mrs. Elmslie for a further account. 
In her reply, she rightly remarks that at such a distance of time memory 
of details is unreliable, and is not sure " whether that which took place 
was in the nature of a dream or of a vision." She desires, therefore, 

1 Cf. cases 193, 194, 311, 332. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 183 

that her full description of what she saw shall not be published ; but says 
that the face was unmistakeable. She adds : 

" I really forget whether it appeared immediately at the time of our 
dear sister's death; but I know my impression at the time was that it fore- 
shadowed such an event, the news of which in due course came by mail." 

In conversation, Mr. de Guerin told me that the figure appeared self- 
luminous (see Chap. XII., 7). He is certain that his own and Mrs. 
Elmslie's visions were on the same night, and that his own was about 
1 1 o'clock. He cannot be certain whether the death took place at 1 1 o'clock 
p.m., of the previous day, in which case it must have preceded the visions 
by some twelve hours ; or 1 1 o'clock p.m. of the same day, in which 
case it must have followed the visions by about twelve hours. Mr. de 
Guerin further told me that, though in a decline, his sister had been 
very decidedly better of late, and he was in no sort of anxiety about 
her. The last account had been that she was gaining strength and flesh. 
The death was extraordinarily sudden. 

3. I turn now to the second of the two theories above 
propounded the theory that one percipient catches the hallucination 
from another by a process of thought-transference. This is certainly 
the explanation that would suggest itself in telepathic cases where 
one of the percipients has previously had no relations, or only slight 
relations, with the distant agent. But clearly the most conclusive 
evidence for the theory of infection would be derived from cases 
involving no distant " agent " at all ; cases which in their inception 
are pathologic, not telepathic purely subjective delusions on the part 
of some one present but which proceed to communicate themselves 
to some other person or persons. If it can be shown that this self-pro- 
pagation is an occasional property of hallucinations as such, there will 
be no difficulty in extending the same explanation to cases where the 
hallucination is in its inception due to a distant agent. If B's purely 
subjective hallucination may affect C. it is only what we should 
a priori expect that B's telepathic hallucination might affect C : such 
communicability would merely be one more of those points of resem- 
blance', which we have already seen to be so numerous, between the 
purely subjective and telepathic classes. And as collective hallucina- 
tions even of subjective or non- veridical origin (i.e., not due to the 
critical situation of some distant agent) would constitute in them- 
selves a form of thought-transference, no excuse is needed for 
examining them here at some length. 

What evidence, then, do we find that hallucinations of the 
senses, as such, may be infectious ? It must be allowed at starting 
that no property of the sort has ever been attributed to them by 


psychologists of repute r 1 the doctrine would be as new to science as 
every other variety of telepathic affection. This, however, is easily 
accounted for. We have already seen that psychologists have 
never made hallucinations, or at any rate transient hallucinations 
of the sane, the subject of careful collection and tabulation; and 
it is among the sane rather than the insane 2 that we should expect 
any phenomenon of thought-transference to present itself. It is 
therefore not surprising that the rare and sporadic evidence for 
collective hallucinations should have escaped notice. But if, on the 
one hand, collective hallucinations have not been recognised by science, 
on the other hand phenomena have sometimes been described by that 
title which have no sort of claim to it. It is here that the real 
importance of distinguishing illusions from hallucinations lies ; 
and I cannot well proceed without first making this distinction plain. 
Illusion consists either in perceiving a totally wrong object in 
place of the right one, as when Don Quixote's imagination trans- 
formed the windmills into giants ; or in investing the right object 
with wrong attributes, as when the stone lion on Northumberland 
House was seen to wag its tail. 3 Either sort of illusion may 
easily be collective. The error is not in the actual sensory 
impression, which is given by the real object and is common to all 
present, but in the subsequent act of judgment by which the nature 
of the object is determined ; and in this act of judgment one 
person has every opportunity of being influenced by another. In the 
attitude of trying to imagine what further attributes will fit in 
naturally with those which the senses perceive, and will with them 
compose some known object, the mind is almost at the mercy of 
external suggestion. We see this constantly exemplified in cases 
where a group of people are puzzling as to the nature of some barely 
visible object, or of some imperfectly heard sound : as soon as some- 
one expresses an opinion, someone else is pretty sure to endorse it, 
and to see or hear the thing in the suggested sense, though on nearer 
approach this may prove to have been incorrect. Even in cases 

1 This was written before the appearance of Dr. E. von Hartmann's tract on Spiritism 
(lately translated by Mr. C. C. Massey), in which he treats the apparitions seen at seances 
as collective hallucinations ; but he regards the influence exercised on the sitters by the 
medium as to some extent exceptional in kind. 

2 As an instance of the insusceptibility of the insane to abnormal influences, it is 
worth noting that they are peculiarly difficult to hypnotise. On the other hand, I ought 
to state that the 2nd chapter of the Supplement contains two cases of what looks like 
telepathic affection of a person of more or less unsound mind. 

3 I have never discovered on what authority this anecdote rests ; but such an illusion 
is, I believe, quite possible. 


where we feel as if we were right beyond the possibility of mistake, 
it often needs an effort to realise how little is given us, and how 
much we ourselves supply. A few slight sensory signs will introduce 
to the mind a whole array of attributes that have been associated 
with them on other occasions ; the whole is then taken to be a single 
and immediate perception of the object ; and since the actual sensory 
signs may be common to several different groups of attributes i.e., 
to several different objects it may easily happen that they suggest 
some group which is not the object actually present. For instance, 
the slight sensory signs which Scott would normally have interpreted 
as the folds of coats and plaids hanging in a dimly-lit hall, were 
interpreted by him, at a moment when the idea of Byron was 
running strongly in his head, as the figure of the deceased poet. 1 
Here the idea which happened to be dominant at the moment was 
what determined the false judgment ; and such a dominant idea may, 
of course, often operate upon many minds at once; as when, in a 
conflagration at the Crystal Palace, a sympathetic crowd watched the 
struggles of an agonised chimpanzee alias a piece of tattered 
blind in the roof; or when a horrified crew recognised in a piece of old 
wreck, which was floating on the waves, the form and peculiar limping 
gait of a drowned comrade. 2 The case of the proverbial crowd and 
the stone lion's tail is somewhat different ; for there the object was 
clearly seen, and recognised for what it was. But we are all of us 
well exercised in imagining familiar objects as moving in position 
and changing in contour ; and the power of evoking mental pictures 
is often, I think, strong enough to enable us slightly to modify our 
visual impressions ; while such devices as half-closing our eyes, or 
shutting them alternately in quick succession, or moving or inclining 

1 An interesting case was given by Mr. W. H. Pollock, in the Christmas number, 
for 1884, of the Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News, under the title "The Ghost at the 
Lyceum." Mr. Pollock has assured me that the description is "an absolute record of fact, 
without a word of garnish " ; and his recollection of the incident, and of the bewilderment 
that it caused, was quite confirmed by his companion's account, as reported to me indepen- 
dently by a common friend. Seated in a box at the theatre, Mr. Pollock and a friend saw, 
during several hours (with intermissions when the lights were turned up), the vivid 
appearance of a decapitated head, with a fine profile and a grey Vandyke beard, resting on 
the lap of a lady in the stalls. At the time, they rejected the idea that this could have been 
an optical effect due to the folds of the lady's garments as they noticed that she moved 
more than once in the course of the evening, while the face remained the same. Mr. Pollock 
seems to have been unaware that, as a possible example of collective hallucination, the vision 
had a very high scientific interest ; or he would scarcely, even for " sporting and dramatic" 
purposes, have taken refuge in so meaningless a designation as " ghost." It may be, how- 
ever, that the case was after all one not of hallucination, but only of illusion. It is at 
any rate impossible, from the record, to be quite sure that adequate means were taken to 
exclude this hypothesis, which, as Mr. Pollock has recently informed me, is the one that 
he is now inclined to adopt. 

- Dr. Hack Tuke, Influence of the Mind upon the Body. 2nd Edition, p. 59 ; Wundt, 
Op. cit., Vol. ii., p. 358. 


the head, will increase the illusion. It is not surprising, then, that a 
strong effort to see a thing in a way in which others are professing to 
see it, should, for a brief period, introduce illusory elements into what 
seems to be a clear and complete view of the object. 

These considerations will certainly suffice to explain the majority 
of the collective apparitions on record. The visions seen during 
battles, such as are especially frequent in the history of the Crusades 
either signs in the heavens or phantom champions may easily 
have had some objective basis. The streak of cloud, which at one 
moment may be " very like a whale," might at another be equally, 
like a fiery sword ; real horsemen might be unrecognised, and the first 
breath of rumour that they were supernatural assistants would be 
caught up with avidity. 1 More deceptive cases however occur, 
which are not illusions, but yet have as little claim as the preceding 
to be called collective hallucinations, if that word be (as throughout 
this treatise it is) confined to the strict sensory meaning. Nothing, 
for instance, could better illustrate what collective hallucinations 
are not, than two cases which Dr. Brierre de Boismont 2 has adduced 
to illustrate what they are. A battalion of infantry, after a 40 
miles' march under a June sun, was quartered for the night in a 
dismal building which had the reputation of being haunted. The 
surgeon of the regiment describes how, about midnight, these soldiers 
rushed out of their quarters with wild cries, and declared that the 
devil had entered their chamber " in the form of a large black dog 
with curly hair, who had bounded upon them, ran over their chests 
with the rapidity of lightning, and disappeared on the side opposite 
to the one at which he had entered." Now on the supposition 

1 The reader will recall the phantom battle in the sky, described by Motley (The 
Rise of the Dutch Republic, pp. 559-60), as to which the depositions of five witnesses were 
taken on oath. The collective vision of an army marching on terra firma, described 
by the Duke of Argyll in Good Woi'ds for January. 1875, would be less easy to account 
for as an illusion : but the record is second-hand, and was not written down till more than 
50 years after the incident is alleged to have occurred. Phantom champions are not yet 
extinct. Mr. J. T. Milward Pierce, of Bow Ranche, Nebraska, U.S.A., has told me 
of a quite recent case, narrated to him by one of the witnesses where the form of a 
defunct Indian Chief, " Brown Bear," led his tribe in a battle against theDacotahs. Mr. 
Pierce has since sent me a first-hand account of the incident from another professed 

A recent case of a more ordinary type is the following, from Mrs. Lane, of 49, Redcliffe 
Square, S.W. When at school, she was sleeping in the bed of a Miss Winch, who had been 
sent home ill ; and waking up, she was much alarmed to see this girl standing at the foot of 
the bed. She addressed the figure, which nodded slowly. She then roused her companions, 
"and they all said they saw Miss Winch, too." The girls did not know, what was learnt 
next day, that Miss Winch was dying ; but even supposing the first percipient's vision to 
have been telepathic, her terrified words, and the dim light, would probably be quite 
sufficient to convert a bed-hanging or a curtain into the suggested form for her com- 
panions' eyes. 

2 Des Hallucinations (Paris, 1862), pp. 280, 396. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 187 

that no real dog or cat had a share in shaping the idea what can be 
more likely than that the general nervousness took sudden form from 
one man's sudden cry, on waking from a nightmare ? There is 
not the slightest proof that all present simultaneously saw the dog, 
and followed his movements. I have already drawn attention 
to the ease with which uneducated persons may slip into believing 
that they have seen what they have only heard of; and under 
excitement this is, of course, doubly easy. One man may have 
believed that he saw ; the rest may merely have believed they had 
seen. De Boismont's second case is that of Dr. Pordage's disciples in 
the middle of the seventeenth century, who saw " the powers of hell 
pass in review before them, seated in chariots, surrounded by dark 
clouds, and drawn by lions, bears, dragons, and tigers. These were 
followed by inferior spirits, who were provided with the ears of a cat 
or a griffin, and with deformed and distorted limbs." But here the 
fact that " it made no difference whether their eyes were open or 
shut " renders it doubtful how far the impression was really more 
than a vivid inward picture ; and there is nothing to contradict, and 
everything to suggest, the notion that one person described his 
impressions in language which would easily conjure up the general 
scene in kindred and excited minds. 

But apart from such spurious types, cases undoubtedly remain 
of really externalised collective hallucination, which are still perfectly 
explicable without resorting to thought-transference. The history 
of religious epidemics supplies instances where a whole group of 
persons have professed to behold some exciting or adorable object, and 
probably actually projected its image into space as part of the 
surrounding world ; but where, without proof (which has never been 
presented) that what was seen was independently observed and 
described, it would be rash to suppose any other cause for the 
similarity of the individual experiences than a previous common 
idea and common expectancy. 1 Nor is even expectancy a necessary 
condition ; there are cases where the suggestion of the moment seems 
sufficient. The most marked of these are hypnotic hallucinations : 
it is as easy for a mesmerist to persuade a group of good " subjects " 
that they all see a particular phantasmal object, as to persuade one of 
them that he sees it. And I think it must be admitted as possible 

1 A probable example is the recent remarkable delusion at Cprano starting from a 
peasant girl's alleged vision of the Virgin in which a crowd of children and many adults 
shared. It is described in the Times for July 31, 1885. 


that mere verbal suggestion may act similarly on certain minds at 
certain times, without the preliminary of any definite hypnotic pro- 
cess. I say at certain times advisedly ; for all clear evidence of the 
sort seems to connect the phenomenon with circumstances of rather 
special absorption or excitement, sometimes even with a state of 
semi-trance. 1 I do not know of any instance where the sane and 
healthy A, simply by saying at a casual moment to the sane and 
healthy B, " There is such and such an object " (not really present, 
and not capable of being imposed as an illusion on some object really 
present), has at once caused the object to be conjured up in space 
before B's eyes. In the most extreme case that has come to my 
knowledge, where something like this has proved possible, very 
strong insistance and repetition on A's part, of the sort that a 
mesmerist employs when seeking to dominate a " subject's " 
mind, are needed before the impression develops into sensory 
form. In cases, therefore, where A has himself had a hallucina- 
tion of which he has spoken at the moment, and B has shared 
it, it is too much to assume at once that B's experience must have 
been exclusively due to the verbal suggestion ; for if A's mere 
suggestion can produce such an effect on B at that particular moment, 
why not at other moments when he suggests the imaginary object 
without having himself seen it ? None the less, of course, ought the 
hypothesis of verbal suggestion to be most carefully considered, in 
relation to the special circumstances of each case, before any other 
hypothesis is even provisionally admitted. 

I have, perhaps, said enough to define the phenomena which are 
really of interest for us here. Fairly to allow of explanation by 

1 If (as intelligent English eye-witnesses believe,) a semi-hypnotic condition, due to 
abnormally concentrated attention, is in great part answerable for the extraordinary 
illusions of Indian jugglery, the same condition might naturally be looked for in cases of 
collective hallucination. Very suggestive in this respect is the following record, by 
Professor Sidgwick, of a scene described to him by Mazzini : 

" In or near some Italian town, Mazzini saw a group of people standing, apparently 
gazing upwards into the sky. Going up to it, he asked one of the gazers what he was 
looking at. ' The cross do you not see? ' was the answer ; and the man pointed to the 
place where the cross was supposed to be. Mazzini, however, could discern no vestige of 
anything cruciform in the sky ; and, much wondering, went up to another gazer, put a 
similar question, and received a similar answer. It was evident that the whole crowd had 
persuaded itself that it was contemplating a marvellous cross. ' So, ' said Mazzini, ' I was 
turning away, when my eye caught the countenance of a gazer who looked somewhat 
more intelligent than the rest, and also, I thought, had a faint air of perplexity and doubt 
in his gaze. I went up to him, and asked what he was looking at. " The cross," he said, 
"there." I took hold of his arm, gave him a slight shake, and' said, "There is not any 
cross at all." A sort of change came over his countenance, as though he was waking 
up from a kind of dream ; and he responded, " No, as you say, there is no cross at all. 
So we two walked away, and left the crowd to their cross. ' It is nearly 20 years since I 
heard this story ; but it made a considerable impression on me, both from the manner in 
which Mazzini told it, and from its importance in relation to the evidence for ' spiritual- 
istic ' phenomena." 


thought-transference, a collective case must present evident marks 
(1) of being a hallucination and not a mere illusion ; (2) of having 
occurred, so to speak, in an isolated way, and not under the dominance 
of any special prepossession ; and (3) of having been independently 
projected by the several percipients, and not merely conjured up by 
one on the suggestion of another. It is naturally not always easy 
to ascertain how far these conditions are met. In judging of the 
auditory cases, especially, great caution is necessary ; for, as we have 
seen above (pp. 125-6), there is scarcely any sort of mere noise which 
may not have some undiscoverable external origin in the house or the 
neighbourhood. Intelligent speech, on the other hand, and certain 
musical sounds, such as bell-sounds or distinct melodic sequences, if 
externally caused, imply conditions the presence or absence of which 
it is usually possible to ascertain. So again in the visual cases, the 
fact of dim or uncertain light may favour the hypothesis of illusion ; 
but where the light is good, the presence or absence of an adequate 
external cause in the vicinity can often be determined with all but 
complete certainty. 1 One point of uncertainty often remains, owing 

1 I am including only cases of hallucinations which have occurred to more than one 
percipient simultaneously, or very nearly so. The extremely perplexing cases, few, but well 
attested, where the same phantasm has been independently described by different 
persons who have at different times encountered it in the same locality, may possibly 
be also connected with the infectious character of hallucinations ; for we cannot pro- 
nounce it to be indispensable that the infectious influence should act at the moment. 
A certain amount of evidence for this explanation is afforded by cases where the ex- 
perience (not apparently due to suggestion or illusion) has sometimes occurred to 
one person alone, and at other times to several together. But the hypothesis, 
as thus extended, becomes doubtful and difficult, and is, moreover, only one out 
of several hypotheses, all about equally doubtful and difficult, that may be 
suggested. (See Mrs. H. Sidgwick's paper " On the Evidence, collected by the Society, 
for Phantasms of the Dead," in the Proceedings of the S.P.R., Vol. iii., especially pp. 146-8.) 

Clearly no such explanation is needed for the general run of traditional appearances 
the white ladies, headless horses, and phantom dogs, which are the most widely-spread 
forms ; or the phantasms which are more or less indigenous to a particular district, like the 
" corpse-candles " of some Welsh counties, and the figures in shrouds of the Western 
Scottish islands. To account for these, we need not go beyond the latent idea in the 
percipient's own mind. But it seems occasionally to happen that the percipient of a 
traditional phantasm is a person not previously acquainted with the tradition. Thus Mr. 
Lowell tells me that he once saw the appearance of the "Witch-farm," on the Massa- 
chusetts coast, though unaware of the local legend concerning it, at the very place to 
which he found afterwards that the legend assigned it ; and in Dyer's English Folk-Lore, 
p, 208, a case is reported where a phantasm, coinciding with and possibly originating in 
a death, took a form that exactly accorded with the ideas of death-apparitions current 
in the place, though the percipient was a transient sojourner whom no rumour of those 
ideas had reached. 

Another type (recorded by Aubrey, Martin, Dalyell, Napier, Gregor, and other 
writers on "second-sight," and possibly genuine), which seems to strain the hypothesis of 
infection somewhat less, is that where physical contact with the percipient of an abnormal ' 
sight or sound has enabled.a second person to share it. Our own collection contains a couple 
of modern instances one first-hand from Mrs. Taunton, of Brook Vale, Witton, near 
Birmingham, the other from two daughters and ason-in-law of the late Mr.and Mrs.George 
Whittaker,of the Bowdlands,Clitheroe,thefirst-hand witnesses. Such a phenomenon might 
at least be compared with the favouring effect of contact in certain "thought-reading" 
results, which (by rare exception among results where contact is a condition) seem not to 
be explicable as "muscle-reading." 


to the way in which the evidence reaches us : we cannot be sure how 
far the mere verbal description of one percipient, after the occur- 
rence, may not have caused another to fill in or modify his own 
recollection with details which he did not himself observe. But if 
both clearly shared in the experience, it is not important that their 
percepts may not have been so precisely similar as is sometimes 
alleged. So far, indeed, from telling against the theory of mental 
transfer, such want of identity is rather what we might have expected, 
both from the numerous approximate successes in experimental 
thought-transference e.g., in reproducing drawings and from the 
evidence that a telepathic impression is liable to be reacted on in 
various ways by the person whom it affects. 

4. I fear to weary the reader by yet further explanations and 
distinctions before examples are given. But difficulty of exposition 
and risk of misapprehension alike culminate in this final chapter ; 
and the patience which has been able to accompany me thus far must 
be so considerable that I venture to make one more demand on it. 

I have propounded the question, what evidence do we find that 
purely subjective hallucinations of the senses may be infectious ? and 
I have implied that I am able to produce some evidence of the sort. 
And, in fact, I am about to cite examples which I think that 
the majority of my readers or of such of them at any rate as 
accept the substantial accuracy of the facts will regard as going some 
way to establish the point. But there are those, I am aware, in whose 
minds some of my instances will produce a doubt whether the 
experiences were really subjective whether they may not have had 
some unknown origin external to any of the perceiving minds ; and I 
admit, though the doubt weakens my argument, that it is one which 
I in some measure share. To explain this, I must recur to a point 
that was very briefly touched on in Chap. XI. (Vol I., p. 512, note). 
It may be remembered that the question there arose whether post- 
mortem appearances of persons some time deceased were necessarily 
subjective hallucinations, or whether they might not be amenable to a 
telepathic explanation ; and I observed that, while telepathy being 
a psychical and not a physical conception was quite able to 
embrace these phenomena as possibly due to the action of human 
minds continuing after bodily death, yet the evidence for them (of a 
sort that would preclude their being regarded as purely subjective 
experiences) was scanty and inconclusive ; and I dismissed the topic 


as not germane to an inquiry concerning telepathic transferences 
between the minds of living persons. But the topic which was 
rightly thus dismissed when we were considering affections p-f a single 
percipient, forces itself on us again when we encounter cases of 
joint percipience. For suppose that the object which B and C both 
simultaneously behold is the form of the deceased A. Then, if (1) 
the idea of B's and C's affection by the still continuing mind of A be 
rejected as it would be by disbelievers in survival after physical 
death yet B's and C's simultaneous affection remains a fact which 
demands recognition in this book ; because, if A does not affect them, 
then one of them must affect the other, i.e., the case is one of 
transference between the minds of living persons. And if (2) the 
idea of A's continuing power to affect B or C be admitted as tenable, 
but the joint affection of B and C by A be regarded as improbable, 
(owing to the difficulties already pointed out of conceiving the projec- 
tion, under a telepathic impulse, of exactly simultaneous and 
corresponding hallucinations) yet again a fact remains which demands 
recognition in this book ; because, if A affects B and not C, then C's 
vision of A must be obtained from B, and the case is again one of 
transference between the minds of living persons. 

The reader will now, perhaps, divine why I hesitate to apply the 
words " purely subjective " to some, at any rate, of the cases in the 
group that awaits us. Though no absent living person was concerned 
in them as agent, I think it would be rash and unscientific to prejudge 
the question (deliberately left open in Chap. XI.) whether they had 
an origin in psychical conditions which have survived the change of 
death. I have shown that alike on either of the above hypotheses 
alike, whether the dead (1) have not, or (2) have, minds which can 
influence the living cases of collective percipience suggestive of 
the dead fall within the legitimate scope of the present inquiry ; but 
I am anxious to avoid any appearance of dogmatic decision between 
(1) and (2). I am about equally dissatisfied with the arguments 
adduced for the former, and with the evidence adduced for the latter. 
But in my view the cases, whatever else they involve, at any rate 
involve an element of quite mundane thought-transference between 
the minds of the living persons concerned; and I must beg the reader 
to bear in mind that it is simply as probable or possible cases of 
thought-transference, and not as manifestations from the dead, that 
those of them which may seem to have reference to the dead are here 
adduced. If the senses of B and C are similarly and simultaneously 


affected without the presence of any material cause, then alike whether 
there is or is not a real immaterial cause outside their two selves, I 
believe that the joint phenomenon still depends (partly, if there is 
such a cause, wholly, if there is not) on psychical communication 
between their two minds. As to the point that is left in abeyance 
the existence or non-existence of the said cause all varieties of 
opinion will be allowed for by defining the group, not positively, as 
cases of " purely subjective " origin, but negatively, as cases which do 
not apparently originate in the condition of any absent living person. 

5. I will begin with visual examples. The following is a 
collective hallucination of what I have called a rudimentary type, as 
not suggesting any special form or human presence ; but it is a 
remarkably prolonged and elaborate specimen of the sort. 1 The 
narrator is Mrs. Ward, of Glen Aray Lodge, Windsor. 

1 Another striking rudimentary hallucination, of the cloud type, in which two persons 
(out of the four who were present) shared, is described in Notes and Queries for September 
8th and 22nd, and November 10th, 1860, and for January 5th, 1861. The narrator is Mr. 
E. L. Swift, who was Keeper of the Jewels in the Tower at the time when the event 
occurred, in the Jewel House. An incorrect version was given, without authority, in 
Gregory's Animal Magnetism. 

In Vol. i., p. 483, 1 drew attention to a particular kind of impression, which, without 
actually developing into a sensory form, yet strongly suggests a particular person's 
presence. It is interesting to observe that such an impression which seems a sort of 
potential hallucination may be collective. Mrs. Easton, of 14, The Crescent, Taunton, 
writes, in January, 1884 : 

"1 have been, on one occasion, impressed with the certainty that a sort of so to 
speak invisible presence was in the room, and my sister, who was in the same room, told 
me some hours after, that she had the same impression at that particular moment, I not 
having spoken of the matter to her. This took place about two or three days after the 
death of a near relative." 

In reply to inquiries, Mrs. Easton adds : 

" In answer to the first question as to whether we ever had such an impression at any 
other time, for myself I can answer ' No, ' decidedly, and my sister cannot remember 
anything of the kind. 

" The second question was, did we connect the impression with our deceased relation 
at the time? For myself, I can answer, 'Yes' ; my sister has described her thoughts at that 
praticular moment in the enclosed letter. 

" The third question, ' Was there a strong bond of affection ? ' Yes. 
"Fourth question, 'Can we be sure that the impression in each mind exactly 
corresponded in time ? ' I am quite certain that, whatever produced this unusual feeling, 
we both experienced it at the same moment, although perhaps in a different way, being so 
unlike in temperament ; I remember looking at my watch on awakening, to know the time. 
"Fifth question, 'How long did the impression last?' For some seconds; the 
impression on my mind was that some unusual presence, something not material, was near." 
The enclosure, from Mrs. Welch, of 5, Colleton Crescent, Exeter, was as follows : 
" In August last, I was sleeping in the room with my sister. I think it was the third 
night after our father's death, and he was lying in a room below. I was aroused out of 
my sleep with a feeling as if some person had entered the room, and come as far as the 
foot of the bed when I awoke. 

" I am particularly nervous at all times, of course after the recent event more so than 
usual ; yet when I awoke, I did not feel the slightest fear, and only wished I could see the 
time, as I instantly thought I should hear of something having happened at that moment 
the more so as our step-mother, we knew, was in a very precarious state. 

"My sister awoke at the same time, and on my telling her of my sensations she told 
me she had felt the same, although she is not in the least of a nervous temperament." 

In reply to a question whether such an impression was unique in her experience, Mrs. 
Welch says : 

" I never experienced the same feelings before, that I can recollect." 


(316) " In May, 1851, I and my husband, the late E. M. Ward, R.A., 
had a curious experience which we were at a loss to account for, though it 
became a subject of frequent conversation, and every effort was made to 
find for it a fitting and rational explanation. 

" We were living at No. 33, Harewood Square. It was in the month 
of May, and my husband and I had been to a quiet gathering of friends in 
the neighbourhood ; we returned about 12 o'clock, letting ourselves in, for 
the servants were in bed, and went straight to our bedroom. Having 
passed such a quiet, unexciting evening, there was nothing much to talk 
about, and my husband was quickly in bed and asleep. I very soon 
followed him, and was just getting into bed, having put out my candle, 
with my face towards the door, when, much to my surprise, I saw, as 
though suspended a little distance from the top of the door, a strange, 
flickering flame ; it was about six inches high, and four inches across the 
widest part, pear-shaped, and of a blueish lilac tint. I was considerably 
startled and must have been much agitated, for my husband (as he 
informed me afterwards) was roused by the sound of my fast beating 
heart. In reply to his inquiries, I drew his attention to the strange flame 
which I still saw suspended from the door frame, and whilst we were 
both wonderingly speculating as to what it could be, it was joined by 
another flame, similar in every respect, but smaller. Greater still was our 
surprise when we observed these two mysterious little lights slowly 
advancing, side by side, towards us ; they came right on to our bed, and 
then, determined to analyse their nature, we both sat up, and my husband 
grasped them with his hands, rubbing them and endeavouring to rid us of 
their society. But, to our astonishment, this treatment had no more effect 
upon them than to break them into small luminous grains, which ran all 
over the bed-covering like quicksilver. Gradually, however, this bright 
inundation began to fade, and, as we still continued our efforts to 
extinguish it, it disappeared. 

" Such is the account of the occurrence. That it actually did occur to 
us we never entertained the slightest doubt. I was certainly wide awake 
at the time, and my mind was troubled in no way, and I was in good 
health otherwise there might be some ground for the belief that the ap- 
pearance was the hallucination of a disordered mind, or of an over- wrought 
brain. My husband, too, was undoubtedly wide awake, and retained a 
perfect recollection of all the details of the vision the next day. We 
discussed it, and tried to fathom its meaning, over and over again, but 
could never arrive at any conclusion about it at all except that as it did 
not act as a forewarning to any coming event, did not correspond to any 
important event, and did not appear to serve any purpose at all, its 
appearance was utterly meaningless. 


In a later letter, Mrs. Ward adds : 

" As the lights were coming to the bed, there were two streaks of 
moonlight on the counterpane, which could not come from any window, as 
the room was darkened. They also when touched, with the two lamps, 
merged into a mass of diamonds." 

In conversation, Mrs. Ward told us that she had never experienced any 
other hallucination of the senses 



We have several other examples of collective hallucinations of 
light. In one (described to us by Mrs. G. T. Haly, of 122, Coningham 
Road, Shepherd's Bush, W., as having occurred a few days after her 
husband's death, and assumed by her to be connected with him), a 
flame as of a candle, but bluer, passed and repassed the bed on which 
the two percipients were lying, at about 18 inches height from the 
floor. In another, a luminous ball was seen in a corner of the room. 
A fourth very remarkable instance, of the brilliant illumination and 
then sudden darkening of an empty room, is described to us by the 
Rev. Edward Ram, of Norwich, as a personal experience of himself and 
his wife but this was in a house where other unaccountable phen- 
omena have been observed ; as was also the case in a fifth instance, 
where a light is described by one percipient, Mrs. W. B. Richmond, 
as a glow over the whole room, out of which (according to her 
recollection) two bright little balls of light seemed to flash out ; and 
by the other (her mother) as " flickering about " specially in a par- 
ticular part of the room. In none of these cases does it seem possible 
that the light was in any way cast or reflected into the room from 
outside. 1 

Coming to instances of a more developed type, we have a con- 
siderable group of cases as to which it might be a possible though 
I think a rather desperate assumption that what was seen was a 
real object, most strangely misinterpreted, or else appearing in most 
improbable circumstances ; and which I do not therefore number as 
evidential items. Specially baffling are some of the cases where a 
carriage, as well as human beings, has appeared. For instance, Major 
W., resident near Conon Bridge, Ross-shire, writes : 

" February 9th, 1882. 

" It was the month of August ; rather a dark night and very still ; 
the hour, midnight ; when before retiring for the night I went, as is often 
my custom, to the front door to look at the weather. When standing for a 
moment on the step, I saw, coming round a turn in the drive, a large close 
carriage and pair of horses, with two men on the box. It passed the front 
of the house, and was going at a rapid rate towards a path which leads to 
a stream, running, at that point, between rather steep banks. There 
is no carriage-road on that side of the house, and I shouted to the 
driver to stop, as, if he went on, he must undoubtedly come to grief. 

1 In the last case, the second percipient suggests the lantern of thieves trying to rob 
the pigeon-house. But in the first place, the pigeon-house was not robbed, and no vestige 
of thieves was found ; and in the second place, the light would have had to penetrate a 
very dark green blind, and thieves are not wont to require for their work an advertisement 
of such preternatural brilliancy. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 195 

The carriage stopped abruptly when it came to the running water, 
turned, and, in doing so, drove over the lawn. I got up to it ; and by this 
time my son had joined me with a lantern. Neither of the men on the box 
had spoken, and there was no sound from the inside of the carriage. 
My son looked in, and all he could discern was a stiff-looking figure sitting 
up in a corner, and draped, apparently, from head to foot in white. 
The absolute silence of the men outside was mysterious, and the white figure 
inside, apparently of a female, not being alarmed or showing any signs 
of life, was strange. Men, carriage, and horses were unknown to me, 
although I know the country so well. The carriage continued its way 
across the lawn, turning up a road which led past the stables, and so 
into the drive again and away. We could see no traces of it the next 
morning no marks of wheels or horse's feet on the soft grass or gravel 
road ; and we never again heard of the carriage or its occupant, though I 
caused careful inquiries to be made the following day. I may mention 
that my wife and daughter also saw the carriage, being attracted to the 
window by my shout. This happened on the 23rd of August, 1878." 

After a visit to the house in September, 1884, Mr. Podmore wrote : 
"Major W., on whom I called to-day, is practically satisfied that what 
he and his family saw was not a real carriage. He showed me the whole 
scene of its appearance. The spot where the carriage appeared to turn 
barely leaves sufficient room for the passage of an ordinary carriage, and 
that a carriage should turn round there seems almost impossible. The 
carriage went for some distance across the lawn a mossy and rather damp 
piece of grass and stopped in front of the house for more than a minute, 
the while Major W. spoke to the man, but without receiving any reply. 
His wife, whom I also saw, was attracted to the window by the sound of 
the wheels, in the first instance, on the gravel. Major W. made many 
inquiries among his neighbours, but could not find that anyone had seen 
the carriage at all. The house is situated on a peninsula stretching between 
the Cromarty and Moray Firths, and some 3 miles from the neck of the 
peninsula. The locality is very lonely, there being no villages or hamlets, 
and but few private residences of any kind ; and it is difficult to imagine 
the errand which could bring a strange carriage into such a country at the 
dead of night. Major W. has had one other purely subjective hallucina- 

In another of the carriage-cases, the hallucination was of a more 
bizarre sort, the coachman and footman on the box having black faces, 
and the four ladies inside being dressed completely in black. The 
vehicle passed the window without producing any sound on the 
gravel. In a third case (quoted above, pp. 97-9), one of the percipients 
was altogether apart from the three others they seeing the 
phantasmal carriage pass the window, and she meeting it some way 
down the road. In a fourth case, our informant Mr. Paul Bird, of 
39, Strand, Calcutta followed a phantom gharrie for 100 yards, 
into the very portico of Hastings House at Alipore, while the same 
vehicle was watched in its approach by his wife from a window. But 

VOL. II. O "2 


more of a puzzle even than the carriage-cases is a narrative received 
from two daughters of a well-known clergyman neither romantic nor 
superstitious witnesses who describe a vast swarm of soundless 
phantasmal shapes, dressed in old-fashioned garments, most of them 
dwarfish, and two with sparks round their faces, by which they and a 
maid were once accompanied for about 200 yards in a lane near Oxford. 
" One might imagine it to be a kind of mirage ; only the whole 
appearance [owing to the dresses] was so unlike what one would have 
seen in any town at the time we saw it." 1 If this must be regarded 
as illusion, because it occurred in misty moonlight, yet an identity 
of impression is described which still suggests mental infection : 
" If one saw a man, all saw a man ; if one saw a woman, all saw a 
woman ; and so on." 

I pass by, however, as necessarily inconclusive, the greater 
number of our instances of collective impression where the appearance 
was seen out of doors in imperfect light though there is not one 
of them which would not be decidedly more remarkable, as a 
specimen of joint illusion, than any that I have found recorded in 
print. 2 The following daylight example is from the Misses Mont- 
gomery, of Beaulieu, Drogheda. 

"March 2nd, 1884. 

(317) "About the year 1875, 1 and my sister (we were about 13 years 
old then) were driving home in the tax-cart one summer afternoon about 4 

1 This case, which in brief abstract may sound like a frightened girl's story, will 
not, I think, produce that impression in the complete account, which may be found in 
the Proceedings of the S.P.R., vol. iii., p. 77. 

2 The following case, remote but first-hand, is made interesting by the fact that one 
of the persons present did not share the experience. Mrs. Stone, of Walditch, Bridport, 
tells us that one beautiful summer evening, after sunset but while it was still quite light, 
she was driving home with a cousin and a friend " three more merry girls could hardly 
be met with " and a man-servant. 

" I saw the figure of a man on the right-hand side, walking, or rather, gliding, at the 
head of the horse. My first idea was that he meant to stop us, but he made no effort of 
the kind, but kept on at the same pace as the horse, neither faster nor slower. At first I 
thought him of great height, but afterwards remarked that he was gliding some distance 
(at least a foot) above the ground. Mary was sitting by me. I pointed out in a low 
voice the figure, but she did not see it, and could not at any time during its appearance. 
Emily was sitting by the man-servant on the front seat ; she heard what I said, turned 
round, and speaking softly, 'I see the man you mention distinctly.' Then the man- 
servant said, in an awful, frightened voice, ' For God's sake, ladies, don't say anything ! 
please keep quiet ! ' or words to that effect. I had heard that horses and other animals 
feel the presence of the supernatural ; in this instance there was no starting or bolting, 
the creature went on at an even pace, almost giving the idea of being controlled by the 
figure . The face was turned away, but the shape of a man in dark clothing was clearly 
defined . My cousin and the man-servant saw it distinctly, but my friend was unable to 
do so, though the figure stood out plainly against the evening light ; she was so placed 
that she ought to have seen it particularly well. At the entrance of the village of 
Charminster it vanished, and we saw it no more. I never heard the road was haunted ." 

This may perhaps have been an optical effect due to the horse's breath ; but many 
breathing horses are out on summer evenings, and I should be glad to know of a similar 
effect in other instances. It is at any rate odd that it should have been interpreted 
in the same way by several observers. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES, 197 

o'clock, when there suddenly appeared, floating over the hedge, a female 
figure moving noiselessly across the road ; the figure was in white, and 
the body in a slanting position, some 1 feet above the ground. The 
horse suddenly stopped and shook with fright, so much so that we could 
not get it on. I called out to my sister : * Did you see that ? ' and she 
said she had, and so did the boy Caffrey, who was in the cart. The figure 
went over the hedge, on the other side of the road, and passed over a field, 
till we lost sight of it in a plantation beyond. Altogether, 1 suppose, we 
watched it for a couple of minutes. It never touched the ground at all, 
but floated calmly along. On reaching home we told our mother of what 
we had seen, and we were perfectly certain it was not a mere delusion or 
illusion, nor an owl, or anything of the kind. 

" I have never seen anything like this nor any apparition before or 
since. We were all in good health at the time, and no one had suggested 
any grounds for the apparition beforehand ; but we afterwards heard that 
the road was supposed to be haunted, and a figure had been seen by some 
of the country folks. 



Professor Barrett, who knows the witnesses, adds that Mrs. Mont- 
gomery remembers the incident well, and the terror her children were in 
They both agreed as to the reality of the figure. Caffrey has gone to 
America, and been lost sight of. 

No one probably will suppose that the witnesses here have 
agreed to repeat, for our benefit, a romance which they fabricated for 
their mother's at the time ; and however much allowance be made 
for childish terror or exaggeration, the community of experience in 
broad daylight seems to exceed what can be attributed to verbal 
suggestions, passed from one to another, d propos of a fleece of cloud 
or an owl. We have a very similar instance from Mr. W. S. Soutar, 
solicitor, of Blairgowrie, N.B. who records that he and his brother, 
as young boys, at play behind their father's house, in the gloaming ot 
a summer evening, " both saw an apparition in the shape of a female 
figure, plainly dressed, with a striped apron over the face, and which 
glided, without any apparent movement of the feet, from the road 
till about half-way between it and the hedge surrounding a shrubbery 
near the house, when the figure suddenly disappeared. There was no 
cover near, behind which the person (if in the body) could hide, the 
spot where it disappeared being bare and open." This case, however, 
is remote, and the second witness is dead. A much more striking 
example (brought to our notice by Mr. A. Farquharson, of North 
Bradley, Trowbridge, Wilts) is one where the senses of two adults 
a gentleman-farmer, described as a hard-headed unromantic business- 
man and his wife were similarly deluded in an exposed space and in 


broad daylight ; but the timidity of the witnesses precludes me from 
giving details. 

To come, however, to indoor cases, of a less dubious type. As a 
rule, the figure seen (just as in purely subjective cases occurring to a 
single percipient) is unrecognised. The following account, though 
remote, is first-hand, and at any rate deserves quotation. It occurs 
in Letters of Philip, 2nd Earl of Chesterfield (1829), p. 11. The 
incident was recorded by Lord Chesterfield in an MS. volume con- 
taining his letters and "notes for my remembrance of things and 
accidents, as they yearly happen to me." 

(318) "A very odd accident this year [1652] befell mee, for being 
come about a law sute to London . . I, waking in the morning about 
8 o'clock, . . . plainly saw, within a yard of my bedside, a thing all 
white like a stand 8 sheet, with a knot atop of it, about 4 or 5 foot high, 
w h I considered a good while, and did rayse myself up in my bed to 
view the better. At last I thrust out both my hands to catch hold of it, 
but, in a moment, like a shadow, it slid to the feet of the bed, out of 

w h I, leap g after it, c d see it no more Doubting least 

something might have happened to my wife, I rid home that day to Pet- 
worth in Sussex, where I had left her with her father, the Earl of North- 
umberland, and as I was going upstairs to* her chamber, I met one of my 
footmen, who told me that he was comming to me with a packet of letters, 
the w h I having taken from him went to my wife, who I found in good 
health, being . . . with Lady Essex, her sister, and another gentle- 
woman, one Mrs. Ramsey . . . They all asked me what made me to 
come home so much sooner than I intended. Whereupon I told them 
what had happened to me that morn 8 ; which they all wondering at 
desired me to open and read the letter that I had taken from the foot- 
man, which I immediately did, and read my wife's letter to mee aloud, 
wherein she desired my speedy return 8 as fear 8 that some ill w d happen 
to mee, because that morning shee had seen a thing all in white, with a 
black face, standing by her bedside. . . . By examining all particulars 
we found that the same day, the same hour, and (as near as can be com- 
puted) the same minute, all that had happened to me had befallen her, 
being fortie miles asunder. The Lady Essex and Mrs. Ramsey were 
witnesses to both our relations." 1 

1 In another case where a phantasm, again of a very unusual aspect, was simultaneously 
perceived by two persons at a distance from one another, we have the special reason for 
supposing it to have been purely subjective in origin, that both percipients were some- 
what liable to subjective visual hallucinations ; but though it comes to us on good authority, 
it is third-hand, and cannot receive an evidential number. Dr. T. King Chambers, 
F.R.C.P., of Shrubs Hill House, Sunningdale, writes : 

" December 26th, 1885. 

" My uncle by marriage. Colonel Macdonald, was subject to frequent hallucinations, 
when sitting up late reading, and working at some improvements in fortification and 
Semaphore telegraphy, which he thought would be of value. The hallucinations were 
wholly visual, I understood, not aural ; though he used to be heard hailing them, and 
what he called ' conversing ' ; yet the conversation was in his usual style of pure mono- 
logue. He was always quite sane as have been all his children and grandchildren. His 
son, Charles, was a civilian in the E.I.C. Service, and, whilst a student at Haileybury 


Here, it will be seen, the two percipients were widely separated, 
which excludes the idea of joint illusion or of verbal suggestion ; 
and the case forms a parallel, among sensory phantasms, to that 
given in Vol. I., p. 240, where the common experience was of an ideal 
and emotional kind. 

In the next example the percipients, though near together, were 
not actually in one another's company. The case is of special interest, 
inasmuch as the two percepts were slightly different, the figure 
being seen by one observer with a hat on, and by the other without, 
and the difference corresponding with the associations natural to each 
in their respective positions. A clergyman writing to us from 
Lincoln, on April 29th, 1885, describes an afternoon call of the 
preceding January. 

(319) "I was ushered into the drawing-room, and was asked to take 
a low arm-chair in the middle of the room ; but I preferred sitting on a 
couch drawn up at right angles to the side of the fireplace, where I could 
command a view, through the window, of the garden. Facing me, with 
her back to this window, sat one lady ; to my left, seated not far from the 
arm-chair mentioned, was another lady, fronting the hearth. While we 
sat chatting upon the subject of my visit, an old man, of somewhat sad 
appearance, dressed in a dark blue over-coat somewhat shabby and 
with a flat-topped felt hat, and remarkable for a white beard, passed the 
window ; and immediately after the front door bell rang. The lady of the 
house was expecting a visit from some lady friend, and remarked ' This 

must be .' I said, ' No, it's an old man with a white beard.' At 

which both ladies present expressed surprise, and began wondering who it 
could be. Just then the door of the room opened, and in walked a well- 
known local practitioner. As soon as he had shaken hands all round, the 
lady of the house said, ' But where is the old man with the white beard ? ' 
To which the doctor replied, ' Yes ; where is he ? ' 

" Our friend, the doctor, had happened to be passing the gate a short 
time before, and had, without premeditation as he says, suddenly turned 
in, struck with the idea of paying an afternoon call. He came up the walk 
towards the hall door, and, in passing the window mentioned, looked into the 

College,, was a constant visitor at our house in Keppel Street, and also in Essex . He was 
the only one of the family who inherited his father's peculiarity, which they both 
considered to be an hereditary racial disease, or rather mental malformation, of no 
practical importance for good or harm, when once so understood by the afflicted person . 

" Shortly before my cousin went to India [where he was killed in a mutiny] when I 
was quite a child, he slept a night at my father's in Keppel Street ; and while going to 
bed he saw a man with a face he did not recognise, dressed in an old-fashioned Spanish 
costume. He was not alarmed, or particularly interested ; but as a matter of chit-chat, 
mentioned it in a letter to his father at Exeter, who answered by return of post that, at 
the same time, he had seen an exactly similar figure, in the same strange dress. I was too 
young at the time to be safely told ghost-stories ; but my father and mother often detailed 
the circumstances as a singular instance of coincidence. I should explain it by the fact 
that both my uncle and cousin were at home in Devon, and fond of history. Both would 
be likely to have a store of half remembered dates relating to the defeat of the Armada 
and Spanish affairs, and the day may have suggested the forgotten date, and clothed it in 
appropriate costume. " T. K. CHAMBERS." 


room where we were sitting, and saw, seated in the low arm-chair, an old man 
exactly answering to the description of the old man I had seen passing 
the window (doubtless when the doctor passed), with this exception, that 
the person he saw had, of course, no hat on. The doctor was surprised not 
to find the old gentleman in the room ; hence his strange reply to the lady's 

" Now observe : / saw the old man exactly at the time the doctor was 
passing the window. I did not see the doctor, whom I know well, who is 
much shorter than the figure I saw, and who wore a brown top-coat, a silk 
hat, and no beard. And the doctor saw the figure in the room, sitting 
down and without a hat. 

" I am not, as far as I know, subject to similar hallucinations, if the 
affair may be rightly so-called." 

Dr. Cant writes to us as follows : 

" Silver Street, Lincoln. 

" May 7th, 1885. 

" I have seen Mr. [the clergyman], and quite agree with all he 

said. The old man was sitting down in the room, and I felt certain of his 
presence, and was greatly astonished not to find him in the room. The 
reports we have given are absolutely true, without any doubts in either of 
our minds. ^ f C ANT> " 

Dr. Cant was asked whether he had ever had any other hallucinations ; 
and also whether he would have been certain to see any real person 
occupying the position where the clergyman saw the figure. He replied : 

" In answer to your questions these phenomena are quite new to me, and 
I never remember having one of the sort before. It was quite impossible 

for the figure that Mr. saw to have been there, as I must have seen 

it when passing, and he only saw one figure, and did not see me at all." 

The next two cases resemble the last, in the point that the 
two percipients do not seem to have seen exactly the same thing. 
Surgeon-Major Samuel Smith, of Wyndham House, Kingsdown 
Parade, Bristol, sent the following account to the Western Daily 
Press (Nov. 30, 1881), and has since confirmed it to us. 

(320) " I solemnly vouch for the truth of the statement made. I will 
add that I have been, although not a professed teetotaller, a total abstainer 
from stimulants for the past 10 years, and that I am not a believer in 
Spiritualism as it exists in the present day. 

" About 20 minutes past 1 1 o'clock on the night of the 20th of April 
last, I was engaged with my wife's mother in playing a selection from 
' La Figlia del Reggimento ' for the flute and piano. We were seated 
in the drawing-room, which was brilliantly lighted by three large gas- 
lights burning in globes which hung from the centre of the ceiling, the 
only other occupants of the room being my wife, who had fallen asleep 
upon the couch, and the baby asleep in the eradle. My wife's brother, 
who had been with us, left the room at 1 1 o'clock, and retired to rest. 
The room itself is spacious, lofty, and parallelogram-shaped, the piano 
occupying a position immediately opposite to the only door of entrance in 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 201 

the middle of the corresponding long side, so that in playing we sat with 
our backs to the door, which was closed. 

" I was thoroughly intent upon the music, which was new to me, and 
difficult to read, so far as the flute was concerned, owing to the small size of 
the notes ; when suddenly, in the midst of the performance, a strange feeling 
of mingled awe and fear came over me, and I distinctly felt the approach 
of someone, or rather of something, coming behind me, and this although 
I was so engrossed with playing ; and in my mind I seemed to perceive 
the shape. As it approached nearer, I turned my head to the right, and 
distinctly perceived a shade of a greyish colour standing by me upon my 
right hand, a little in advance of me. I did not see the whole figure, but 
what I saw was part of a shadowy face, the outline of the forehead, nose, 
mouth, chin, and a part of the neck being visible. Strange to say, I 
do not remember seeing the eye, but the figure appeared to have a top hat 
upon its head. As I gazed upon it, it vanished, and with it the feelings, 
to a great extent, to which it gave rise. Of the mingled feelings which its 
presence raised in my mind, I should say that awe predominated. 

" I did not cease playing, and subsequently played other pieces by the 
old masters, sang some songs, and finally went to bed, and slept well. Nor 
did I mention the matter to my wife's mother that night, either at the 
time of the occurrence, or before retiring to rest. Now, however, comes 
the most remarkable part of the matter. At or about 11.30 a. m. on the 
following day, my wife's mother came into the private room, and suddenly 
said, ' Did you see something when you turned your head last night, when 
you were playing ? ' I did not immediately reply, but the strange event of 
the preceding night flashed across my mind instantly. I was, indeed, too 
greatly surprised to reply at once, for I did not believe at the time that 
she had noticed the action upon my part ; and, as I have already said, I 
had not mentioned the matter to her, or even hinted at it. 

" ' Why do you ask ? ' I replied. 

" ' Because I thought you did.' 

" 'Did you see anything?' I asked. 

" ' Yes, I believed that someone had come into the room, as I felt that 
someone had come in.' 

" ' Did you think it was a man or a woman ? ' 

" ' I felt that it was a man, and at first believed it to be James' (my 
wife's brother), ' who had come down, and I wondered how he could come 
in without my hearing him.' 

" ' Did you see anything 1 ' I asked. 

" ' .Yes, I saw the back and shoulders of the form of a man ; it passed 
across like a shadow behind you, stood to your right hand, and then 
disappeared. I was not alarmed, but surprised. 

" So ends the narrative. In no way can I explain the cause, or 
sequence of events. As they occurred, so I present them." 

Surgeon-Major Smith (January 15th, 1886), in sending his mother-in- 
law's confirmation, adds : 

" In speaking of the matter to-day she said she felt the presence of the 
visitor in her mind before she saw it ; and this is my experience of it. I 
felt its presence before I saw it." 1 

1 See Vol. i., p. 483, and Chap, xii., 2. 


\.. " Wyndham House, Kingsdown, Bristol, 

"January 15th, 1886. 

" Agreeably to the request of Mr. Gurney, I write, but have nothing 
to add to the statement of my experience of the strange visitation 
described in the Western Daily Press in November, 1881 ; the facts being 
as therein stated. " HANNAH ROBINSON." 

Mr. Smith has repeated the account to me on the spot ; and it then 
became evident that Mrs. Robinson, turning her head the instant after he 
did the same, would have seen any flesh-and-blood figure rather more full- 
face than he did ; instead of which she saw the back. The extremely 
distinct and startling character of the experience came out more impres- 
sively in conversation than in the written account. Neither percipient 
can recall having had anything like a hallucination on any other occasion. 

The following account is from the Rev. D. W. G. Gwynne, M.D., 
Neuaddvach, Pontardulais, South Wales. He first describes how he 

took up his abode at P House, near Taunton, in 1853, and 

how both he and his wife were made uncomfortable by auditory 
experiences to which they could find no clue. He proceeds : 

(321) "I now come to the mutual experience of something that is as fresh 
in its impression as if it were the occurrence of yesterday. During the 
night I became aware of a draped figure passing across the foot of the bed 
towards the fire-place. I had the impression that the arm was raised, 
pointing with the hand towards the mantel-piece, on which a night>light 
was burning. Mrs. Gwynne at this moment seized my arm, and the light 
was extinguished. Notwithstanding, I distinctly saw the figure returning 
towards the door, and being under the impression that one of our servants 
had found her way into our room, I leapt out of bed to intercept the 
intruder, but found, and saw, nothing. I rushed to the door, and 
endeavoured to follow the supposed intruder, and it was not until I found 
the door locked, as usual, that I was painfully impressed. I need hardly 
say that Mrs. Gwynne was in a very nervous state. She asked me what 
I had seen, and I told her. She had seen the same figure, but her 
impression was that the figure placed its hand over the night-light and 
extinguished it. 

"The night-light in question was relit and placed in a toilette basin, 
and burned naturally. I tried to convince myself that it might have been 
a gust of wind down the chimney that put the light out ; but that will not 
account for the spectral appearance, which remains a mystery. 

" D, W. G. GWYNNE." 

Mrs. Gwynne writes, on April 15, 1884 : 

" In addition to my husband's statement, which I read, I can only say 
that the account he has given you accords with my remembrance of the 
' unearthly vision,' but I distinctly saw the hand of the phantom placed 
over the night-light, which was at once extinguished. I tried to cling to 
Dr. Gwynne, but he leapt out of bed with a view, as he afterwards said, of 
intercepting some supposed intruder. The door was locked as usual, and 
was so when he tried it. He lit a candle at once, and looked under the 
bed, and into a closet, but saw nothing. The night-light was also relit, 


which was placed on the wash-stand, and together with the candle, 
remained burning all night. I must observe that I had never taken to use 
night-lights before we lived there, and only did so when I had been so 
often disturbed and alarmed by sighs and heavy breathing close to my side 
of the bed. Dr. Gwynne, on the appearance of the phantom, in order to 
calm my agitated state, tried to reason with me, and to persuade me that 
it might have been the effects of the moonlight and clouds passing over the 
openings of the shutter, and possibly that a gust of wind might have 
extinguished the light, but I knew differently. When we had both been 
awakened at the same moment apparently, and together saw that unpleasant 
figure, tall and as it were draped like a nun, deliberately walk up to the 
mantel-piece and put out the light with the right hand, there could be no 
mistake about it ; and I distinctly heard the rustling sound of garments as 
the figure turned and left through the door, after my husband's attempt to 
stop it with his open arms. The moonlight was very clear and the white 
dimity curtains only partly closed. MARY GWYNNE " 

[As telling against the purely subjective origin of this experience, I 
ought to mention that there was distinct evidence of others' having 
observed unaccountable phenomena in the house, though this was not 
known by Dr. and Mrs. Gwynne till after their own observation. They 
soon afterwards gave up the house.] 

In the next case the difference is still more marked, the percept 
being visual to one person and auditory to the other ; while at the 
same time something of the same idea seems to have been suggested 
to both. For the purpose in view, the case (in spite of certain dis- 
crepancies in the two accounts) is, perhaps, stronger than it looks. 
For the fact that the visual and the auditory experience were both 
unshared, is a decided indication that they were neither of them due 
to a real external cause ; and if they were hallucinations, then (since 
no words passed till after both had been experienced) it seems at any 
rate very possible that one of them produced the other by thought- 
transference. Lady C. writes, on Oct. 13, 1884 : 

(322) "In October, 1879, I was staying at Bishopthorpe, near York, 
with the Archbishop of York. I was sleeping with Miss Z. T., when I 
suddenly saw a white figure fly through the room from the door to the 
window. It was only a shadowy form, and passed in a moment. I felt 
utterly terrified and called out at once, ' Did you see that V and at the 
same moment Miss Z. T. exclaimed, ' Did you hear that 1 ' Then I said, 
instantly, ' I saw an angel fly through the room,' and she said, ' I heard an 
angel singing.' 

" We were both very much frightened for a little while, but said " 
nothing about it to any one. " K. C." 

Miss T. writes : 

"December 19th, 1884. 

" Late one night, about October 17th, 1879, Lady C. (then Lady K. L.) 


and I were preparing to go to sleep, after talking some time, when I heard 
something like very faint music, and seemed to feel what people call ' a 
presence.' I put out my hand and touched Lady C., saying, ' Did you hear 
that 1 ' She said, ' Oh, don't ! Just now I saw something going across 
the room ! ' We were both a good deal frightened, and tried to go to sleep 
as soon as we could. But I remember asking Lady C. exactly what she 
had seen, and she said, ' A sort of white shadow, like a spirit.' The above 
occurred at Bishopthorpe, York. " Z. J. T." 

In the next two examples (in which the figure was unrecognised) 
no difference seems to have been noted in the impressions of the two 
percipients. Mr. Bettany, of 2, Eckington Villas, Ashbourne Grove, 
Dulwich, S.E., writes : 

"November, 1884. 

(323) " One night, early this year, I became conscious of a figure in 
my bedroom. It was a crouching figure of a woman, enveloped in a black 
cloak and hood. My impression was that the woman was old, but I did 
not see a face. This figure slowly and stealthily advanced from the bed- 
room door to a wardrobe on the same side of the room. It then suddenly 
and entirely disappeared, and, from the sudden shock, I gave a sharp loud 
cry. I never saw such an appearance before or since. I consider myself 
unusually unlikely to see apparitions. This figure and circumstance were 
like no dream, but were to me real and evident, and there appeared to be 
no transition between waking and sleeping. I was convinced that what I 
saw was a waking sight. I have no idea whom the figure represented. I 
had then occupied this house nearly three years, and I know nothing of 
former occupants. 

" ~No light was carried nor was any light burning in the room. The 
figure was visible and the wardrobe was visible ; but when the figure 
disappeared darkness was complete. 1 The door was found locked. 

" G. T. BETTANY." 
Mrs. Bettany (the narrator of cases 20 and 309) writes : 

" On the night referred to, I woke suddenly, I know not from what 
cause. My husband was leaning on his elbow, looking intently at a strange 
woman whom I saw crouching by the wardrobe. I believed it to be a real 
person. It, however, suddenly disappeared. My husband then gave a cry 
as he describes. He then told me what he had seen. I tried the door and 
found it locked. 

" The thought has occurred to me that I may have seen this by sympa- 
thetic transference from my husband ; but, against this, I am much more 
likely to see something of this kind than he. 

" Without having mentioned this apparition to my servants, the nurse- 
maid told me, next day, that Muriel (a child of three years) had woke 
her in the night, saying, without any fear in her voice, ' Clara, Clara, 
there is an old woman in the room.' The nurse herself saw nothing. I 
may add that my cook has on several occasions asked me if I had entered 

i See Vol. i., pp. 550-1. 


her room during the night, on occasions when I had certainly not done so. 
She appeared much mystified on learning this. 


The narrator of the next experience requests that her name may 

not appear. 

"February 17th, 1884. 

(324) " Shortly after my marriage, about the year 1847, 1 went to stay 
at my father's house. I had at that time two sisters at home, unmarried. 
The elder of the two was nearly two years younger than myself, and would 
therefore be about 22 years of age at the time I speak of. The other 
sister was much younger than us both, and at this time was about 14 years 
old. My two sisters slept together in a room adjoining mine. 

" One morning, on my going down to breakfast, my elder sister said to 
me, ' Sarah, such a strange thing happened in the night. I was sleeping 
outside (the other side of the bed was against the wall), and I was awoke 
by a feeling of oppression at my chest, as though there was a weight there, 
and I could not breathe. On opening my eyes I was startled to see a veiled 
figure bending over me. While I looked, I felt Anna's arm come round 
me. After what seemed to me a few minutes the form disappeared. 
Then Anna whispered, 'Oh Lizzie, I thought it was going to take you away.' " 

" This was my sister's account. I took an opportunity, when my 
younger sister and I were alone, to ask her what that was that she and 
Lizzie had seen. She said she was awoke by a feeling of oppression, as 
though she could not breathe, and on opening her eyes, in the dim light of 
the room (the blind was down, but there was a gas lamp in front of the 
house, which gave some light to the room), she saw a veiled figure bending 
over Lizzie, and she put her arm round her, as she thought it had come to 
take her away. 

" My father and his family shortly after moved into another house, my 
sisters still occupying a room together. They assured me that once in this 
other house they were visited by the same appearance, but this time it was 
over Anna. She only lived a short time after, dying at sixteen and a-half . 

" On sending this account to my sister, in case I might, through lapse 
of time, have altered the matter, she assures me that it is substantially 
corerct, and adds that the form was grey, darker and thicker in the middle ; 
she also adds that the feeling of horror was intense. " L. S. B." 

[Unfortunately the sister's letter was destroyed.] 

The following case is a very singular one. The phenomenon of 
mutual hypnotisation (or rather of hypnotisation of one person through 
the process of hypnotising another) is one of which we have other 
examples. But I have met with no other instance of genuine transfer 
of a hallucination between two hypnotised persons; and, if this, 
instance is a genuine one, it is difficult to resist the conclusion that 
it depended on the peculiar condition established the two not being 
" subjects" influenced in common by a third person, but the originator 
of the hallucination, whichever of the two it was, having exerted an 


active influence on the other, and presumably established the sort of 
rapport which is so common a feature of hypnotism. It could of course 
only be by the rarest accident that an operator who had established 
such a rapport should then and there become the victim of a sensory 
hallucination, which would thus have a chance of being transferred ; 
and the accident in this case was the fact that the operator herself 
fell into an abnormal condition. I do not number the narrative, as it 
is impossible to be quite certain that some unconscious look or gesture 
on the part of one percipient did not evoke the image in the other's 
mind ; for though the hypnotic state in itself has no special tendency 
to promote hallucinations, except such as are suggested and impressed 
in the plainest manner, in the present instance there seems to have 
been a certain amount of expectancy, which probably facilitated the 
affection in both the persons concerned. The case was received from 
Miss Becket, of Hotel Vendome, Boston, U.S.A., an Associate of the 
S.P.R, who wrote on January 25, 1886. 

Miss Becket begins by describing how on one occasion she attempted 
to hypnotise a friend who was standing two or three yards from her. She 
made slow downward passes till her friend " shivered with cold." She 
then reversed the passes, but soon herself- became rigid, with outstretched 
arms. " Both the lady and myself turned our heads, and seemed to 
follow with our eyes the movements of some invisible body around the 
room. We seemed to see the same horrible something in the same part of 
the room, for our faces had an expression of unutterable horror. Some- 
times we looked behind this one object, as at something following its 
progress round the room, but our eyes instantly returned to the greater 
attraction, and at last our faces seemed so frozen in an agony of fear that 
the gentleman sprang towards his wife, and dragged her to a seat, and used 
great physical force before he could rouse her from the terrible spell. I 
seemed to be in part liberated with her, but it was a long time before we 
were really free from the strange influence we had fallen under. 

" When we could talk, we found that we had each seen the same vision, 
in every detail alike. I have always had a strong faith in religion. My 
friends were too philosophical to admit dogmas into their minds. But the 
one horrible central figure in our visions, it seems, must have originated in 
my brain, from its resemblance to my idea of a personal devil. At all 
events, we both saw, suddenly take form out of empty spaee, the giant 
figure of a man. His face expressed fiendish cruelty and wickedness, and 
we felt ourselves in part in his power, and knew that he was exulting in 
this power. He seemed to be followed by a great many pigmy figures, 
that danced about the room and made ugly faces at us, but dared not do 
more in the presence of this master spirit. It was when the supernatural 
malignancy of this frightful creature had almost overpowered us with fear 
and horror, that our faces expressed such torture as to cause the gentleman 
to interfere, and try to rouse us from the spell. 

" As I have said, it was entirely out of our plan that / should share in 


the vision. I had counted on watching the effects of my passes on my 
friend ; and the shock of this unwelcome surprise put an end to any 
further experiments in future. MARIA J. C. BECKET." 

The following is an independent and very different description, from 
Mrs. Frederic D. Williams, the lady who shared in the experience : 

" 35 bls , Rue de Fleurus, Paris. 

"March 24th, 1886. 

She first narrates how Miss Becket and she used to try on each other, 
standing some distance apart, the effect of " magnetic passes," and how 
she herself used to feel a hot current of air, and Miss Becket a cool one ; l 
and continues : " I cannot remember who [i.e., which of us] acted as 
magnetiser on the particular occasion to which Miss Becket alludes : the 
chief feature of it I, however, do recollect. This was seeing a strange 
something an appearance of a shadowy, transparent film, or veil, or sheet 
of thinnest vapour, 2 float slowly upward between Miss Becket and myself, 
but (as it appeared to me) nearer her. Any possible doubt, if not of the 
object itself, at least of our perception of something unusual, should be 
disproved by the fact of our exclaiming simultaneously, ' Did you see 
that ! ' or words to that effect. I hesitate to say anything of the truth 
of which I am not absolutely sure ; but I have an impression amounting 
to certainty that it was upon the reverse passes being made that the above 
incident happened. [This detail agrees with Miss Becket's statement.] 

" L. L. W." 

On receiving this account, I told Mrs. Williams what Miss Becket's 
version was, and also asked whether Mr. Williams remembered the incident. 
She replied that Mr. Williams could corroborate her statement as being 
the same that she made to him at the time, but does not remember having 
been present, though he admits that he may have been. She remembers 
that her experience differed from Miss Becket's in not being alarming, and 
that Miss Becket described hers as " infernal." What she saw had the same 
sort of shape as a veil falling around a human form, and changed like a 
cloud while being watched. She concludes : " I had forgotten that Miss 
Becket became rigid, but now remember the circumstance, and this fact, 
that I was very much alarmed, not at what I saw (although it is quite 
true we opened our eyes very wide at that), but at the state into which 
Miss Becket was thrown, and also at the possibility of having done her 
some serious harm through my inexperience in such matters ; which would 
seem to decide, at least in my own mind, a point on which Miss Becket 
and I seem to be at variance, namely, that it was I who was ' magnetis- 
ing,' and not she. I do not know, however, that this is of any importance." 

[Memory is clearly more likely to have erred as to the resemblance 
than as to the difference of the two visions. But even if we only had Mrs. 
Williams's account, some germ of thought-transference would be strongly 
suggested by the sudden and simultaneous occurrence of two such singular 

1 From this it would appear that Miss Becket confounded her friend's temperature- 
sensations with her own. It seems to be an accident whether such subjective impressions 
take the form of heat or cold. 

2 This rudimentary sort of appearance, as we have seen, is a well established form of 
subjective hallucination (see, e.g., p. 73, note). 


I now come to cases where the figure was recognised. The 
following transitional instance, of semi-recognition, is from Captain 
Cecil Norton, late of the 5th Lancers, who tells us that he has had 
no other hallucination of the senses. 

" 5, Queen's Gate, S.W. 

" December 20th, 1885. 

(325) " About Christmas time 1875 or 1876, being officer on duty, I was 
seated at the mess table of the 5th Lancers, in the West Cavalry Barracks, 
at Aldershot. There were 10 or 12 other officers present, and amongst 
them Mr. John Atkinson (now of Erchfont Manor, near Devizes, Wilts), 
the Surgeon-Major of the regiment, who sat on my right, but at the end 
of the table furthest from me and next to Mr. Russell. [Captain Norton 
was sitting at the end of the table and directly facing the window.] At 
about 8,45 p.m. Atkinson suddenly glared at the window to his right, 
thereby attracting the notice of Russell, who, seizing his arm, said, ' Good 
gracious, Doctor, what's the matter with you ? ' This caused me to look in 
the direction in which I saw Atkinson looking, viz., at the window 
opposite, and I there saw (for the curtains were looped up, although the 
room was lighted by a powerful central gas light in the roof and by 
candles on the table) a young woman, in what appeared a soiled or 
somewhat worn bridal dress, walk or glide slowly past the window from 
east to west. She was about at the centre of the window when I observed 
her, and outside the window. No person could have actually been in the 
position where she appeared, as the window in question is about 30 feet 
above the ground. 

" The nearest buildings to the window referred to are the Infantry 
Barracks opposite, about 300 yards distant. Behind where I sat is a con- 
servatory, which was examined by me, as well as the front window, 
immediately after the occurrence. There was no person in the conserva- 
tory. [It was unused in the winter.] The nearest buildings to it are 
the officers' stables, over which are the staff sergeants' quarters, about 50 
yards distant. 

" The occurrence made little if any impression upon me, though it 
impressed others who were in the room. All present had been drinking 
very little wine ; and the dinner had been very quiet. 

" It has just occurred to me that I may be wrong as to the time of 
year and that the occurrence may have taken place about 15th October or 
about 15th March. CECIL NORTON." 

Mr. Atkinson writes : 

" Erchfont Manor, Devizes. 

"August 31st, 1885. 

" The appearance of a woman which I saw pass the mess-room window 
at Aldershot seemed to be outside, and it passed from east to west. The 
mess-room is on the first floor, so the woman would have been walking in 
the air. There has been a very nice story made out of it like most other 
ghost-stories, founded on an optical illusion." 

[Captain Norton's vivd voce account made it tolerably clear, in my 
opinion, that the case was one of hallucination, not illusion. He 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 209 

further mentions that both Mr. Atkinson and he were " satisfied that the 
face and form of the woman seen were familiar," though they could not at the 
moment identify the person. Captain Norton afterwards felt sure that 
the likeness was to a photograph which he was in the habit of seeing in 
the room of the veterinary surgeon of the regiment, representing the 
surgeon's deceased wife in bridal dress. Oddly enough, this man was at 
the time, unknown to his friends, actually dying or within a day or two of 
death, in the same building. But Mr. Atkinson recalls nothing about the 
photograph ; and the coincidence is not one to which we can attach weight.] 

The next instance must be reckoned as " ambiguous " in origin ; as, 
though the person whose form was seen was in an abnormal state, this 
had been to some extent chronic, and no reason is known why he should 
have exercised a telepathic agency on the day in question more than 
on any other. The narrator desires that her name may not be printed. 

" October 28th, 1885. 

(326) " In the month of November, 1843, myself, my eldest sister, and 
the man-servant were driving home from a small town to our parsonage in 
the country. The time might be about half past 4 or 5 p.m. As we came 
slowly up the hill by the churchyard wall, we saw a gentleman in walking- 
costume going into the vestry door. We both exclaimed, ' That's papa,' 
and the man George said at the same moment, 'Why there's the master.' 
My father was then ill, and away from home many miles away. He died 
the following January 23rd, 1844. He wore a particular long cloak which 
I should have recognised anywhere, and which he had many years, and 
wore as a loose wrap. [What is meant clearly is that the cloak in which 
the figure appeared to be dressed exactly resembled that of the narrator's 
father.] He looked exactly like himself, and was going in by the small 
vestry door he used to enter the church by when going to take duty. I do 
not think he looked at us, but seemed intent on entering the church, and 
disappeared inside. We were all much frightened, and searched round 
the house and church but could see no one, and no one had been seen 
about. I recollect the occurrence as if it had been yesterday, and, as I write, 
see all distinctly in my mind's eye. 

" The man-servant is dead ; my sister begs to corroborate my account. 

" S. R." 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. R. says : 

" My sister has always, when I have talked of the vision, said she saw 
it so likewise, and she reiterated that only last summer, but she is not 
equal to write about it. I quite see the weak point, if the church was not 
searched inside. I can't say it was, nor can I say it was not. Old George, 
the man, was most fond of his master, and may have gone into the church ; 
but I can't say. I only know we were all so terribly frightened. The 
vision was sudden, so true to life, and even to the particular long cloak, . 
all gathered in to a collar clasped at the throat. I ought to have said that 
the figure seemed in the act of going in by the vestry door : we did not see 
him enter, as we drove on in great fright to the house. My father was 
then under medical treatment at Northampton." 

Mrs. R. gives details, showing the absolute impossibility that her father 

VOL. n. p 


could really have " left Northampton, being a dying man, so to speak, 
when admitted," and come to the spot where he was seen, unknown to all 
his friends. " Then, again," she adds, " the church was always kept locked, 
the keys at the parsonage, supposing for a moment' -that we saw a living 
figure. I recollect that inquiry was made of the villagers as to any strange 
gentleman having been seen about, and the answer was ' No.' " 

Asked whether she or her sister have ever had a hallucination of the 
senses on any other occasion, Mrs. R. says, " I can emphatically answer 
'No,' for both of us." Her sister was about 19 at the time, and she 
herself 11 " a fresh young child with perfect nerves." 

The following account is from Mrs. Moberley, of Tynwald, Hythe. 

"May 9th, 1884. 

(327) " The case of hallucination shared by myself and a friend was 
rather odd. We were both convinced we saw one afternoon a friend pass 
before the window in which we stood, and enter the garden. We both bowed 
to him, and believed he returned the greeting. He was in sight for some short 
time ; quite long enough to allow of a distinct recognition, and the road 
along which he passed was near to the window at which we stood. A quiet 
country road, we knew every passer-by by sight and name, and our friend 
was a remarkable man in some ways, not one to be easily confounded with 
other people a short, brisk, alert, foreign-looking man, with jet black 
hair and white whiskers, a decidedly un-English overcoat, and a salute 
peculiar to himself, a wave of the hat and a low bow, with which he never 
failed to greet us. We waited to hear him announced in vain. On her 
way home my friend met his son, who was extremely perplexed at hearing 
that his father had been to our house. He had been intending to come, 
but finding that he should be engaged had sent his son instead. Of course 
when we all met, the mystery was exhaustively discussed, and dismissed as 
a mystery. " FEAS. MOBERLEY." 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Moberley says that the date was 1863; 
that she was 19, and in good health ; and that she has never had any 
other hallucination. The lady who shared the experience with her declines 
to answer any questions, saying that "it is a question of principle." 
Mrs. Moberley adds, " She has not forgotten the circumstance : she would 
have been only too glad to say so." 

Bearing in mind the " arrival " cases of Chap. XIV., 7, we 
cannot here assume it as quite certain that the direction of the absent 
person's thoughts had nothing to do with the appearance; but if to 
this extent " ambiguous," the case seems at any rate one of collective 
hallucination. The same remark applies to the next example from 
Mrs. Forsyth Hunter, of 2, Victoria Crescent, St. Heliers, Jersey. 

" 1882. 

(328) " Another odd appearance l was that of my elder daughter, a 
bright lively girl of fifteen. I had placed her at a finishing school in 

1 Some apparently veridical cases from the same informant will be found below 
Nos. 408, 553, 554, 650. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 211 

Edinburgh, and returned to my cottage, in M. Next morning at break- 
fast, I suddenly looked out of the window, and saw her quite distinctly 
coming in at the garden gate, in pork-pie hat, grey dress looped up over a 
red petticoat, just as she had been the day before. Not a word said I, but 
M., my second daughter [since deceased], exclaimed joyously and wonder- 
ingly, ' There is B ! ' For the few seconds the vision lasted, I saw her, as 
if stooping to undo the latch of the gate. Afterwards she told me how 
unhappy she had been for the first day in school, and what an intense 
longing had seized her to return to us. No doubt both her sister and 
myself were thinking of her, at the same time." 

In answer to the question whether she can be quite certain that the 
figure seen was not that of a stranger bearing some resemblance to her 
daughter, Mrs. Hunter replies : 

" Your supposition amuses me. The figure melted away, in the act of 
seemingly stooping to undo the latch of our little gate. It was a bright 
autumn morning. We were seated at breakfast, the table close to a bow- 
window, overlooking a strip of garden, belonging to a cottage at Melrose : 
the gate being a low wooden gate, and no house near. It was my 
daughter's face, figure, and dress, just as she had appeared the day 
before, when I took her to school at Edinburgh. My daughter was 
distinguished-looking, and no one in that neighbourhood could at all be 
mistaken for her. Our sight was quite good, and neither short-sighted. 
In short, there is no doubt that in some mysterious way her longing and 
our thinking [of her] brought about this appearance. Another explana- 
tion might be that our imaginations might at the same moment have called 
up the figure." 

[The facts that the phantasm presented exactly the aspect of the real 
figure so recently seen, and that Mrs. Hunter's thoughts were much 
occupied with her absent daughter, and further that she had previously 
had a subjective " after-image " of this very daughter (Chap. XII., 4), 
decidedly favour the supposition that her experience on this occasion was 
also of that character. And if so, the case seems clearly to be one where 
a purely subjective hallucination has been transferred.] 

In the next example, the apparition seems more definitely 
independent of any conscious mental action on the part of the absent 
person; for it would be hard to attribute a special telepathic influence 
to some casual image of his usual resort that may have flitted across 
his mind, at the same time that his form appeared. The two 
percipients were at the time secretaries to societies of which the 
offices were in the same building. The narrator is Mr. R. Mouat, 
of 60, Huntingdon Street, Barnsbury, N. His account, which 
was written down soon after the occurrence, has been slightly 

(329) "On Thursday, the 5th of September, 1867, about the hour of 
10.45 a.m., on entering my office, I found my clerk in conversation with the 
porter, and the Rev. Mr. H. standing at the clerk's back. I was just on 
the point of asking Mr. H. what had brought him in so early (he worked 

VOL. II. P 2 


in the same room as myself, but was not in the habit of coming till about 
mid-day) when my clerk began questioning me about a telegram which had 
missed rne. The conversation lasted some minutes, and in the midst of it 
the porter gave me a letter which explained by whom the telegram had 
been sent. During this scene Mr. R., from an office upstairs, came in and 
listened to what was going on. On opening the letter, I immediately 
made known its purport, and looked Mr. H. full in the face as I spoke. I 
was much struck by the melancholy look he had, and observed that he was 
without his neck-tie. At this juncture Mr. R. and the porter left the room. 
I spoke to Mr. H., saying, ' Well, what's the matter with you ? You look 
so sour.' He made no answer, but continued looking fixedly at me. I took 
up an enclosure which had accompanied the letter and read it through, still 
seeing Mr. H. standing opposite to me at the corner of the table. As I 
laid the papers down, my clerk said,' Here, sir, is a letter come from Mr. H.' 
No sooner had he pronounced the name than Mr. H. disappeared in a 
second. I was for a time quite dumbfounded, which astonished my clerk, 
who (it now turned out) had not seen Mr. H., and absolutely denied that 
he had been in the office that morning. The purport of the letter from 
Mr. H., which my clerk gave me, and which had been written on the 
previous day, was that, feeling unwell, he should not come to the office 
that Thursday, but requested me to forward his letters to him at his house. 
" The next day (Friday), about noon, Mr. H. entered the office ; and 
when I asked him where he was on the Thursday about 10.45, he replied 
that he had just finished breakfast, was in the company of his wife, and had 
never left his house during the day. I felt shy of mentioning the subject 
to Mr. R., but on the Monday following I could not refrain from asking 
him if he remembered looking in on Thursday morning. ' Perfectly,' he 
replied ; ' you were having a long confab with your clerk about a telegram, 
which you subsequently discovered came from Mr. C.' On my asking him 
if he remembered who were present, he answered, ' The clerk, the porter, 
you and H.' On my asking him further, he said, 'He was standing at 
the corner of the table, opposite you. I addressed him, but he made no 
reply, only took up a book and began reading. I could not help looking 
at him, as the first thing that struck me was his being at the office so early, 
and the next his melancholy look, so different from his usual manner ; but 
that I attributed to his being annoyed about the discussion going on. I 
left him standing in the same position when I went out, followed by the 
porter.' On my making known to Mr. R. that Mr. H. was 14 miles off the 
whole of that day he grew quite indignant at my doubting the evidence 
of his eyesight, and insisted on the porter being called up and interrogated. 
The porter however, like the clerk, had not seen the figure." 

Mr. R. has supplied independent and precise corroboration of these 
facts, so far as he was a party to them the one insignificant difference 
being that he says he did not speak to Mr. H., but " gesticulated in fun to 
him, pointing to Mr. M. and the clerk, who were having an altercation 
about a telegram ; but my fun did not seem at all catching, Mr. H. 
apparently not being inclined, as he often was, to make fun out of 
surrounding circumstances." He adds that he has never experienced any 
other hallucination of the senses ; and Mr. Mouat made a similar state- 
ment vivd voce to the present writer. 


Cases of this type naturally suggest the question whether they 
may not be parallel to those cases of casual agency (Chap. XIV., 5), 
where the same person has on several occasions, unconnected with any 
crisis, been the source of hallucination, now to one friend now to 
another. But even supposing such an impression as the above, of an 
absent person who is in a normal state, to be telepathic and not purely 
subjective in its inception, no one on reflection will maintain that by 
pure accident two percipients were casually affected in this extremely 
rare way at ike same moment. And if not, then something took place 
between them ; which if what one saw was not suggested to the 
other by verbal or physical signs must be of the nature of thought- 

The next narrative is from Mr. James Cowley, who wrote from 
32, Langton Street, Cathay, Bristol, on Jan. 7, 1884 : 

(330) " My eldest son is a twin. The night after his dear mother was 
laid in the grave at the Highgate Cemetery (1845) I had him in bed with 
me. (I was then residing at 39, Charlotte Terrace, Islington.) Something 
causing me to start from my sleep, I saw, with all the distinctness possible 
to visual power, my dearest angel receding, in a bent position, as if she had 
been blessing one or both of us, with a kiss. At the same instant the 
child, only two years and five months old, exclaimed, ' There's mother ! ' 
You will hardly wonder that, after the night had passed away, I was 
perplexed to know whether I had only dreamt it, or whether it was real. 
But the reference made to the matter by my dear little motherless one, the 
moment he awoke, removed all possibility of doubt." 

The next account is from Mr. Charles A. W. Lett, of the Military 

and Royal Naval Club, Albemarle Street, W. 

"December 3rd, 1885. 

(331) "On the 5th April, 1873, my wife's father, Captain Towns, 
died at his residence, Cranbrook, Rose Bay, near Sydney, N. S. Wales. 
About 6 weeks after his death, my wife had occasion, one evening about 
9 o'clock, to go to one of the bedrooms in the house. She was accompanied 
by a young lady, Miss Berthon, and as they entered the room the gas 
was burning all the time they were amazed to see, reflected as it were 
on the polished surface of the wardrobe, the image of Captain Towns. It 
was barely half figure, 1 the head, shoulders, and part of the arms only 
showing in fact, it was like an ordinary medallion portrait, but life-size. 
The face appeared wan and pale, as it did before his death ; and he wore 
a kind of grey flannel jacket, in which he had been accustomed to sleep. 
Surprised and half alarmed at what they saw, their first idea was that a 
portrait had been hung in the room, and that what they saw was its reflec- " 
tion but there was no picture of the kind. 

" Whilst they were looking and wondering, my wife's sister, Miss 
Towns, came into the room, and before either of the others had 
time to speak she exclaimed, ' Good gracious ! Do you see papa ? ' 

1 See p. 33. note. 


One of the housemaids happened to be passing down stairs at the 
moment, and she was called in, and asked if she saw anything, and her reply 
was, * Oh, miss ! the master.' Graham Captain Towns' old body servant 
was then sent for, and he also immediately exclaimed, ' Oh, Lord save us ! 
Mrs. Lett, it's the Captain ! ' The butler was called, and then Mrs. Crane, 
my wife's nurse, and they both said what they saw. Finally, Mrs. Towns 
was sent for, and, Seeing the apparition, she advanced towards it with her 
arm extended as if to touch it, and as she passed her hand over the -panel 
of the wardrobe the figure gradually faded away, and never again appeared, 
though the room was regularly occupied for a long time after. 

" These are the simple facts of the case, and they admit of no doubt ; 
no kind of intimation was given to any of the witnesses ; the same 
question was put to each one as they came into the room, and the reply 
was given without hesitation by each. It was by the merest accident 
that I did not see the apparition. I was in the house at the time, but 
did not hear when I was called. " C. A. W. LETT." 

" We, the undersigned, having read the above statement, certify that 
it is strictly accurate, as we both were witnesses of the apparition. 


Mrs. Lett assures me that neither she nor her sister ever experienced 
a hallucination of the senses on any other occasion. She is positive 
that the recognition of the appearance on the part of each of the later 
witnesses was independent, and not due to any suggestion from the 
persons already in the room. 

[We hope in time to receive the corroboration of Miss Berthon, and 
of Mrs. Crane, Mrs. Lett's nurse.] 

These last are cases where the distinction to which I have called 
attention (pp. 190-2) must be specially borne in mind. My central 
object being to prove that ideas may be transferred from mind to 
mind without words or physical signs, I am presenting certain 
collective sensory experiences which I think may constitute one type 
of such transference. Now believers in communications with the 
departed will probably need so little convincing as to the general 
theory of the far less startling transferences between living persons, 
that on them I am not concerned to press the evidence of this particular 
type. But of the rest of my readers I would ask supposing the above 
and similar occurrences to be truly described on what hypothesis, 
other than that of the transferability of hallucinations as such, they 
would explain them. 

I pass by some other examples of the same kind ; as no insistence 
on my point of view in quoting them would prevent my seeming to 
some to be explaining away veritable manifestations as subjective 
delusions, and to others to be introducing " ghosts " by a side-wind. 
But I give the following as a further interesting case of impressions 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 215 

which, though probably simultaneous, were not similar. The 
narrative was originally printed in July, 1883, in an account of the 
Orphanage where it occurred, entitled The Orphanage and Home, 
Aberlour, Craigellachie, &c. (pp. 44-5). The narrator throughout 
is the Rev. C. Jupp, Warden of the Orphanage. _ -'.\ 

(332) "In 1875, a man died leaving a widow and six orphan children. 
The 3 eldest were admitted into the Orphanage. Three years afterwards 
the widow died, and friends succeeded in getting funds to send the rest 
here, the youngest being about 4 years of age. [Late one evening, about 
6 months after the admission of the younger children, some visitors arrived 
unexpectedly ; and] the Warden agreed to take a bed in the little ones' 
dormitory, which contained 10 beds, 9 occupied. 

" In the morning, at breakfast, the Warden made the following 
statement: 'As near as I can tell I fell asleep about 11 o'clock, and 
slept very soundly for some time. I suddenly woke without any apparent 
reason, and felt an impulse to turn round, my face being towards the 
wall, from the children. Before turning, I looked up and saw a soft 
light in the room. The gas was burning low in the hall, and the 
dormitory door being open, I thought it probable that the light came 
from that source. It was soon evident, however, that such was not 
the case. I turned round, and then a wonderful vision met my gaze. 
Over the second bed from mine, and on the same side of the room, 
there was floating a small cloud of light, forming a halo of the bright- 
ness of the moon on an ordinary moonlight night. 

" ' I sat upright in bed, looking at this strange appearance, took up 
my watch and found the hands pointing to 5 minutes to 1. Every- 
thing was quiet, and all the children sleeping soundly. In the bed, 
over which the light seemed to float, slept the youngest of the 6 children 
mentioned above. 

" ' I asked myself, " Am I dreaming?" No ! I was wide awake. I was 
seized with a strong impulse to rise and touch the substance, or whatever 
it might be (for it was about 5 feet high), and was getting up when some- 
thing seemed to hold me back. I am certain I heard nothing, yet I felt 
and perfectly understood the words " No, lie down, it won't hurt you." I 
at once did what I felt I was told to do. I fell asleep shortly afterwards 
and rose at half-past 5, that being my usual time. 

" ' At 6 o'clock I began dressing the children, beginning at the bed 
furthest from the one in which I slept. Presently I came to the bed over 
which I had seen the light hovering. I took the little boy out, placed him 
on my knee, and put on some of his clothes. The child had been talking 
with the others ; suddenly he was silent. And then, looking me hard in 
the face with an extraordinary expression, he said, "Oh, Mr. Jupp, rny 
mother came to me last night. Did you see her ? " For a moment I could 
not answer the child. I then thought it better to pass it off, and said, 
" Come, we must make haste, or we shall be late for breakfast." ' 

" The child never afterwards referred to the matter, we are told, nor 
has it since ever been mentioned to him. The Warden says it is a mystery 
to him ; he simply states the fact and there leaves the matter, being 
perfectly satisfied that he was mistaken in no one particular." 


In answer to inquiries, the Rev. C. Jupp writes to us : 

" The Orphanage and Convalescent Home, Aberlour, Craigellachie. 

" November 13th, 1883. 

" I fear anything the little boy might now say would be unreliable, or 
I would at once question him. Although the matter was fully discussed 
at the time, it was never mentioned in the hearing of the child ; and yet, 
when at the request of friends, the account was published in our little 
magazine, and the child read it, his countenance changed, and looking up, 
he said, 'Mr. Jupp, that is me.' 1 said, 'Yes, that is what we saw.' He 
said, ' Yes,' and then seemed to fall into deep thought, evidently with 
pleasant remembrances, for he smiled so sweetly to himself, and seemed to 
forget I was present. 

" I much regret now that I did not learn something from the child at 
the time. " CHAS. JUPP." 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Jupp says that he has never had any 
other hallucination of the senses ; and adds, " My wife was the only 
person of adult age to whom I mentioned the circumstance at the time. 
Shortly after, I mentioned it to our Bishop and Primus." 

Mrs. Jupp writes, from the Orphanage, on June 23, 1886 : 

" This is to certify that the account of the light seen by the Warden 
of this establishment is correct, and was mentioned to me at the time " 
i.e., next morning. 

It is possible that the child's experience here was a dream ; if so, 
the case might be taken as a link . between the two classes of 
phenomena collective hallucinations and simultaneous dreams 
which I have referred to as so closely related (p. 171). 1 

I will give one more " recognised " case, which presents the 
curious feature that the figure seen was that of one of the per- 

1 In the Life and Correspondence of Charles Mathews, by Mrs. Mathews, pp. 94, 95, 
a case is recorded which again illustrates this relation. One night, when Mr. and 
the future Mrs. Mathews were intimate acquaintances, but without any intention 
of marrying, and when they were at a distance from one another, they had a precisely 
similar vision, which so violently affected both of them that they fell out of their 
respective beds, and were found on their respective floors ; Mr. Mathews was so much 
affected as to be extremely ill for a day afterwards. The experiences were independently 
described long before they were compared. The joint vision was one of which the 
substance might have been easily suggested to either of the parties by a recent incident ; 
it was in fact the apparition of Mr. Mathews' former wife, who, before her death, had 
tried to make them promise to marry one another ; but it is difficult to believe that it 
was by accident that experiences so unique as those described corrresponded and 
coincided. If, on the other hand, the incident was telepathic, and one experience was the 
cause or the condition of the other, it is interesting to remark that the visions in fact much 
more resembled waking hallucinations than genuine dreams ; for Mrs. Mathews especially 
records that both she and Mr. Mathews had been unable to sleep through restlessness. 

The following case is interesting enough to deserve quotation, though not ostensibly 
"collective," and possibly no more than a single subjective hallucination. We received 
it from the Rev. Arthur Bellamy, of Publow Vicarage, Bristol, in February, 1886 ; but 
the particulars were first published in 1878. 

' ' When a girl at school my wife made an agreement with a fellow pupil, Miss 
W., that the one of them who died first should, if Divinely permitted, appear after her 
decease to the survivor. In 1874 my wife, who had not seen or heard anything of her 
former school-friend for some years, casually heard of her death. The news reminded 
her of her former agreement, and then, becoming nervous, she told me of it. I knew of 
my wife's compact, but I had never seen a photograph of her friend, or heard any 
description of her. [Mr. Bellamy told the present writer, in conversation, that his mind 
had not been in the least dwelling on the compact.] 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 217 

cipients. I have spoken before (Chap. XII, 8, first note) of a form 
of hallucination, as I hold it, which consists in seeming to see oneself 
as a person outside one ; and I have also pointed out (p. 85, note) that 
one of our informants who has had an experience of the sort is also 
one of the few persons who have given us evidence of what I have 
called casual agency, exercised in the midst of quite ordinary life. 
Now the fact that a person who has, so to speak, casually impressed 
herself, has at other times casually impressed others, is in itself of 
great interest ; but it leads us on to the following still more interest- 
ing case, where the " double " was seen by its original and by others 
at the same time. The account is from Mrs. Hall, of The Yews, 
Gretton, near Kettering, and was received in December, 1883. 

(333) " In the autumn of 1863, I was living with my husband and 
first baby, a child of 8 months, in a lone house, called Sibberton, near 
Wansford, Northamptonshire, which in by-gone days had been a church. 
As the weather became more wintry, a married cousin and her husband 

"A night or two afterwards as I was sleeping with my wife, a fire brightly burning in 
the room and a candle alight, I suddenly awoke, and saw a lady sitting by the side of the 
bed where my wife was sleeping soundly. At once I sat up in the bed, and gazed so 
intently that even now I can recall her form and features. Had I the pencil and the brush 
of a Millais, I could transfer to canvas an exact likeness of the ghostly visitant. I 
remember that I was much struck, as I looked intently at her, with the careful arrange- 
ment of her coiffure, every single hair being most carefully brushed down. How long I 
sat and gazed I cannot say, but directly the apparition ceased to be, I got out of bed to 
see if any of my wife's garments had by any means optically deluded me. I found 
nothing in the line of vision but a bare wall. Hallucination on my part I rejected as out 
of the question, and I doubted not that I had really seen an apparition. Returning to 
bed, I lay till my wife some hours after awoke and then I gave her an account of her 
friend's appearance. I described her colour, form, &c., all of which exactly tallied with 
my wife's recollection of Miss W. Finally I asked, ' But was there any special point to 
strike one in her appearance ?' ' Yes,' my wife promptly replied ; ' we girls use_d to tease 
her at school for devoting so much time to the arrangement of her hair.' This was the 
very thing which I have said so much struck me. Such are the simple facts. 

"I will only add that till 1874 I had never seen an apparition, and that I have not 
seen one since. "ARTHUR BELLAMY." 

We have also seen an account written by Mrs. Bellamy in May, 1879, which entirely 
agrees with the above, except that she " thinks it was a fortnight after the death " that 
the vision occurred, and that the light was "the dim light of a night-lamp." She 
says, " The description accorded in all points with my deceased friend." In conversation 
Mr. Bellamy described the form as seen in a very clear light (see Vol i., pp. 550-1) ; and 
this may account for his idea that the room itself was lighted by fire and candle. 

This experience, as I have said, may have been purely subjective ; and identification 
of a person's appearance by mere description is generally to be regarded with great doubt. 
But in view of the circumstances, and especially of the fact that Mr. Bellamy has never 
had any other hallucination, two alternative hypotheses seem at least worth suggesting. 
(1) Believers in telepathic phantasms may suspect Mr. Bellamy's experience to have been 
conditioned by his wife's state of mind possibly even by a dream, forgotten on waking, 
in which her friend figured. (2) Believers in the possibility of post-mortem communica- 
tions, if they believe that this was one of them, might further suppose that Mr. Bellamy's 
experience depended on a psychical influence exercised in the first instance on Mrs. 
Bellamy, though acting below the level of her normal consciousness which would mak 
the case parallel to Nos. 242 and 355. To me, I confess, this appears a more reasonable 
supposition than that a direct influence (so to speak) missed its mark, and was exercised 
on Mr. Bellamy by a stranger who cared nothing about him. 

I may mention that we have another first-hand case of just the same type, where the 
percipient was unaware of any compact, and was quite unoccupied with the thought of 
the dead person. She was, however, a young child at the time, and I therefore do not 
quote the account. 


came on a visit. One night, when we were having supper, an apparition . 
stood at the end of the sideboard. We four sat at the dining-table ; and yet, 
with great inconsistency, / stood as this ghostly visitor again, in a spotted, 
light muslin summer dress, and without any terrible peculiarities of air 
or manner. We all four saw it, my husband having attracted our 
attention to it. saying, ' It is Sarah,' in a tone of recognition, meaning 
me. It at once disappeared. None of us felt any fear, it seemed too 
natural and familiar. 

" The apparition seemed utterly apart from myself and my feelings, as 
a picture or statue. My three relatives, who, with me, saw the 
apparition, are all dead; they died in about the years 1868-69. 


The dress in which the figure appeared was not like any that Mrs. Hall 
had at the time, though she wore one like it nearly two years afterwards. 
Mrs. Hall has had other visual hallucinations, which were all connected 
with ill-health or nervous shock ; one which occurred a few months before 
that here described had represented herself as if " laid out." 

I now pass to auditory cases. I have spoken of the caution 
which these require ; l but the following instances must, I think, 
have been more than mere misinterpretations of real sounds. 

The first account is from a lady of unimpeachable veracity ; and 
the account, though written in the third person, is first-hand. 

"November, 1884. 

(334) " Some 20 years ago, Miss G. [the narrator] was recovering from 
a severe illness, and it was of the utmost importance for her to have a 

1 Even the sound of the human voice though ordinarily so distinctive may be 
illusory. For example, we should hardly, I think, be justified in regarding the two 
following cases as other than joint illusions, due to some undiscovered source of sound in 
the house. Mr. Gascoigne Bevan, of the Bank House, Sudbury, writes, in 1884 : 

" Some few years ago and since, I have been living in this house, and manager of the 
bank. I returned home one evening in the summer time with a friend. On entering by 
the garden door, we were both greeted with the sounds of children's laughter, peal after 
peal, all over the house. ' Why,' says my friend, ' I did not know you had children in 
the house, or I would not have come.' T don't know why I answered, but I did so: 
'Hush, don't say anything ; you will frighten Mrs. Springett, my_ housekeeper.' I ran 
all over the house, looking in all the rooms, in vain, for an explanation. I know there was 
no one in the house except Mrs. Springett, her old husband and an under servant." 

[Mr. Bevan believes that the friend who shared this experience has recently died in 

Miss Twynam, of 1, Waterloo Place, Southampton, writes, on Nov. 12, 1885 : 

"I had myself repeatedly heard the voice calling my name, 'Ellen,' at various 
intervals, extending over some months, and had mentioned the fact to the different 
members of the family, but never to my knowledge in the presence of the servants. I 
have always been laughed at, and told it was only my fancy, and no one then had heard 
it but myself. On one occasion, I and my sister were in the drawing-room, and my 
mother and aunt, who were both invalids, were in their respective bedrooms upstairs, on 
opposite sides of the house ; while my brother was in another sitting-room downstairs, on 
the other side of the hall : and the servants were both in the kitchen, which was an 
underground one. I and my sister heard the voice distinctly call ' Ellen, Ellen ! ' a 
clear, high, refined woman's voice, but with something strange and unusual about it. 
My sister at once noticed it, turning to me and saying, ' There, I have heard it myself 
this time. ' I still, however, thought it might really be someone, so went to my mother, 
asking whether she had called. She said, 'No, 'but she had heard someone calling me, 
and thought it was my aunt. I went to her, and she said exactly the same, only thought 
it was my mother. I then went to my brother. He said, 'No ; ' but had heard someone 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 219 

good night, in order to wind her up for a journey to Edinburgh next day. 
All the house was sent to bed early, and the utmost quiet enjoined upon 
everybody. A devoted friend, whose name was Louisa, went to bed with 
her, in order to be close at hand if anything should be wanted. About an 
hour after she had lain down she was startled by a loud outcry, ' Louie, 
Louie ! ' as if someone was in urgent want of assistance. Miss G. thought 
that probably someone had slipped and was hanging over the banisters ; 
she anxiously turned to her friend trying to rouse her. Her friend made 
no offer to rise, but said, in a very marked way, ' Did you hear that 
voice ? It Was my mother ; I hear it constantly.' Next morning every 
inquiry was made ; but no call whatever had been made." 

I have already mentioned that the hearing of the name, in the tones 
of a familiar voice, is one of the commonest and most recurrent forms 
of subjective hallucination ; but whatever view be taken of the origin 
of the friend's impression, we may reasonably suppose that it was 
through her that it was communicated to Miss G. 

The next example was sent to us by Mr. George Saxon, of Park- 
lands, Bruton, Somersetshire, who completely confirms the narrative 
as far as he was concerned. The following is his wife's account : 

"February 26th, 1885. 

(335) "On first coming to this house to reside, in September, 1879, 
myself and two servants were in the kitchen talking one evening at 
about 10.30 ; and we all three distinctly heard a voice coming from the 
next room, or the passage that leads from the kitchen to this room, 
saying three times, ' Are you coming ? ' On the first occasion I answered 
and said, ' I am coming, dear,' thinking it was my husband calling, whom 
I supposed to be in the next room. The voice again said the second 
time, ' Are you coming ? ' and one of the servants said, ' You had better 
go ; master is calling.' The voice again said the third time, ' Are you 

call quite plainly. I then went down to the servants, and asked whether they had heard 
anyone calling. They said, ' Yes ; ' they thought it was mistress. But there was nothing 
about them to lead me to think they were playing any trick, and they had never any idea 
that I had heard this voice before. The voice sounded to me as though it were above me, 
and yet very close to me, and it gave me a strange uncomfortable feeling. I dp not think 
it was the servants, as they answered so naturally, as a matter of course, that it was their 
mistress who had called. Our house stood in a garden near the village, but I am sure it 
was no one from outside, as the voice was so decidedly in the house, and apparently close 
to us. " ELLEN B. TWYNAM." 

, Miss Twynam's sister says : 

"I perfectly remember the occurrence alluded to by my sister. I distinctly heard 
the voice calling her name, and noticed at the time that it was very clear, and resembled 
a woman's voice, but with a strangely unnatural sound which attracted my attention. 
I remember turning to her and saying, ' I have heard it for myself this time,' as she had 
mentioned the fact of repeatedly hearing her name called, but I had never heard it, 
though other people had done so before ; but on this occasion everybody in the house 
heard it at the same time. I have no doubt whatever that the voice came from no one in 
the house. "MARIA TWYNAM." - 

I have carefully questioned these informants, and believe that the account is accurate. 
But it seems possible to suppose that some peculiar sound in the house was interpreted 
in the way which Miss E. B. Twynam's description of her own experience had 

It is curious that we have another case where an unaccountable sound, heard several 
times by two persons in the same house, was the call "Ellen, Ellen," which was the name 
of one of them. Perhaps there is something in the sound which renders it easily simulated. 


coming 1 ' I then went through the passage before mentioned, to the 
next room, where I thought to find my husband, there being no one else 
in the house except three children, who were upstairs fast asleep. On 
going through the passage into the next room, I found no one there, 
and no light, it being quite dark. I then returned to the kitchen and 
obtained a light, and went through the said room into the room beyond, 
where I found my husband, who was busy writing letters, and he had not 
called or spoken. This room he was in had the door shut. We all thought 
it very strange, and went up to see the children, who were all fast 
asleep. One of the servants before mentioned, I should say, had left 
my service and had only come down by train (10 miles) for the day, 
and was to return [arriving home at 8 p.m.] by the last train, which she 
missed and had to stay the night. She had a daughter-in-law expecting 
to be confined, to whom she was going back. She was an elderly person, 
had lost a son not long before, and used to see at times ' ghosts,' or what 
appeared human beings, but disappeared suddenly and mysteriously. 


Mr. Saxon adds : 

" The house is quite an isolated one, standing in gardens away from a 
road, and about half-a-mile from the town. The doors and windows were 
closed. The voice was evidently within the house ; and could not have 
come from anyone in the house. Our children's ages were respectively 
9 years, 7 years, 5 years and 7 months. We were sure they were all 
asleep at the time, as we went up at once to see. I asked them the next 
day ; besides, it was not the voice of the children, but seemed a low 
plaintive voice. Notwithstanding, iny wife and the two servants thought 
it must have been myself calling from the next room, I being the only 
other being about." 

I have examined the localities, and saw how natural it was that Mrs. 
Saxon should imagine her husband to be calling from the nearer room. She 
describes the voice as very distinct and startling. She has occasionally 
had the hallucination of hearing her own name called, when overtired ; 
but never of anything else. 

Here, as in the last example, we have to note a slight tendency 
to subjective hallucination, which in the servant's case may have been 
intensified by recent trouble ; and, without absolutely excluding 
the hypothesis of telepathic influence from her daughter-in-law, 1 I 
still think it more probable that a purely subjective hallucination 
on her part, easily referable to her anxiety about her daughter-in- 
law's condition, was psychically transferred to her two companions. 

The next example is from the Rev. W. Raymond, Rector of Bally - 
heigue, Co. Kerry. I need not repeat with regard to it the 
comments made on cases 330 and 331. Whatever view be taken as 
to the origin of the sound, it is impossible to suppose that it was by 
accident that the two identical impressions so exactly coincided. 

1 The repetition of the experience somewhat favours this hypothesis (see p. 105). 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 221 

"December 18th, 1884. 

(336) " About 30 years ago, Miss Mildred Nash, my mother's aunt, died 
in my mother's house, at the advanced age of 82 years. She had been blind 
for some years, and an orphan cousin of mine had been -much in attendance 
on her. My aunt lived and died in a room on the ground floor in the front 
of our house, which was situated in a retired street of Tralee. A few days 
after her death, my cousin and I were sitting, on a summer evening, at the 
window of the room over the room in which my aunt had died. I heard 
distinctly the words ' Rosy, Rosy ' (my cousin's name), apparently from the 
room beneath, and in my aunt's voice ; then I heard my cousin answer 
to the call ; she also heard the voice. I, struck with the strangeness of the 
circumstance, at once threw up the window to see if it were a voice from 
the street, but there was no one visible, and there could be no one there 
without being seen. I then searched the house all around, but there was 
nobody near except ourselves my cousin and myself. The tale ends there ; 
nothing afterwards happened in connection ; merely the unaccountable 
fact that two persons did independently hear such a voice as I have 
mentioned. I heard both the name called and the answer. 

"Win. RAYMOND." 

Writing on January 9th, 1885, Mr. Raymond says : 
" I send you, as soon as I was able to get it, the enclosed statement in 
corroboration, sent me by my cousin. She mentioned an item that helped 
to fix the facts in her memory (and which shows the superstition of the 
people here), that her neighbours all said she should not have answered, 
but, as she says, no harm came of it. This was my only experience of 
auditory hallucination." 

The enclosed statement was as follows : 

"Tralee, January 8th, 1885. 

" My cousin, Rev. William Raymond, has asked me if I remember 
about the voice we heard at the time of the death of old Miss Nash, his 
aunt. I do remember that a few days after her death he and I were 
sitting, one summer evening, in the room over the room where she died, 
that I heard my name called, apparently from that room and in her voice, 
and that I answered the call, and that we searched and could find no one 
about who could have spoken. " ROSE RAYMOND." 

In answer to an inquiry, Miss Raymond states that this is her sole 
experience of an auditory hallucination. 

It remains to illustrate the musical type of collective hallucina- 
tion.. The following account is from Mr. and Mrs. Sewell, of Eden 
Villas, Albert Park, Didsbury. The latter (writing on March 25th, 
1885) tells us that in the spring of 1863, a little girl of theirs, called 
Lilly, was ill. 

(337) " My husband came home about 3 o'clock, and, to please Lilly ,- 
said he would have his dinner in the bedroom with her. I sat beside the bed 
with one of Lilly's hands in mine, my husband was eating his dinner, and 
one little boy was talking to Lilly, and all were quietly trying to amuse 
the patient, when our attention was roused by sounds of the music of an 

harp, which proceeded from a corner cupboard in one corner of 


the room. All was hushed, and I said, ' Lilly, do you hear that pretty 
music 1 ' and she said, ' No,' at which I was much surprised, for she was a 
great lover of music. The sounds increased until the room was full of 
melody, when it gradually and slowly seemed to pass down the stairs and 
ceased. The servant, who was occupied in the kitchen, two stories below, 
heard the sounds, and our eldest daughter, who was going into the larder, 
stopped in the passage to listen and wonder where the music came from, 
and the servant called to her, ' Do you hear that music 1 ' It was then a 
few moments past 4 o'clock in the afternoon. 

" The next day (Sunday) my old nurse and aunt came up to see how 
Lilly was, and were, with my husband, all in the room with the child. 
I had gone down into the kitchen to prepare some little dainty milk-food 
for her, when the same sounds of ^Eolian music were heard by all three 
in the room, and I heard the same in the kitchen. Monday passed, but 
we had no repetition. On Tuesday, at the same hour, we [i.e., Mr. and 
Mrs. Sewell] once more heard the same wailing ^Eolian music from the 
same part of the room ; again it increased in volume, until the room was 
full of wailing melody ; and again did the sounds appear to pass through 
the door, down the stairs, and out at the front door. Now, this music 
was heard three different days, at the same time each day, and not only by 
those in the room with the child, but by myself, my daughter, and the 
servant, two flights of stairs below the room the child was in ; and on 
the second day by my aunt and nurse and the children, who were in the 

"One circumstance, I think, was very remarkable : the child herself, 
who had a perfect passion for music, never heard a sound. There cannot 
be any mistake in the sounds, for no instrument played by human hands 
can make the same sounds as the wailing ^olian harp. We had lived in 
the same house 6 years, and remained in it 12 years more, and we never 
heard similar music either before or after. " SAB AH A. SEWELL." 

Mr. Sewell says :- "April, 1885. 

" The only confirmation which is now available is that of myself. I 
can speak with all sincerity. I heard the sweet music identically with 
my wife. The music was heard on Saturday, 2nd of May, a little before 
4 o'clock in the afternoon, also on the next day at about the same time, 
and also on the following Tuesday at about the same hour. Those who 
heard the music were my wife, myself, my wife's aunt, the nurse, our son 
Richard, aged 7 ; our son Thomas, aged 9 (the last four all dead), our 
eldest daughter, aged 11, and our servant, who shortly left us and went 
to Ireland to her husband, who was a soldier, and was soon lost sight of. 
Our eldest daughter is now in New York, and I have no doubt but that 
she will remember the circumstance. I am quite satisfied that the music 
heard was not produced by someone at a distance, for our house was then 
situated in a long garden, some 50 yards distant from the public road, and 
the adjoining house to ours was unoccupied at the time. The sound was 
not a muffled sound at all, but the soft, wild notes of an ^^Eolian harp, which 
rose and fell distinctly, and increased gradually, until the room was full 
of sound, as loud as the full swell of an organ, and it rolled slowly down 
the stairs, dying softly on the ear in weird cadences. I am certain it was 
not produced by human fingers. " MATHEW SEWELL." 


I have copied the following extract from a letter written to Mr. Sewell 
by his daughter, Mrs. Lee, and dated July 20th, 1885. 

" Williams Bridge, New York. 

" I do distinctly remember hearing the music before Lilly's death, 
and also remember the impression it made on us children at the time, the 
feeling of terror and fear we had, at not understanding where the music 
came from and what kind of music it was." 

[A personal interview with Mr. and Mrs. Sewell has made evident to 
me how uniquely impressive to them this incident was. The music ap- 
peared to issue from a particular corner of the room, Which was not one 
formed by external walls ; and the nature of the sound makes it hard to 
explain as an objective effect, due to air or water ; while the fact that 
one person present, with sensitive ears, did not share the experience seems 
almost fatal to such an explanation. The sound lasted on each occasion 
not more than half a minute. The little girl died on the Tuesday evening. 
If the hallucination be connected with her abnormal condition, the incident 
(like case 335 above) would belong to the succeeding section.] 

A further example of the musical class, with even more complete 
attestation, has on account of its length been placed in the 
Supplement (p. 639) : the following shorter specimen may be given 
here. The late Mrs. Yates, of 54, Columbia Square, E., wrote in 1884: 

(338) " In 1870 I lost a dearly loved daughter, 21 years old ; she died 
at noonday, of aneurism. At night, my only other daughter was with me, 
when all at once we both assumed a listening attitude, and we both heard 
the sweetest of spiritual music, although it seemed so remote, my ears were 
hurt listening so intently. Till some hours after, my dear girl and I were 
afraid to inquire of each other had we heard it, for fear we were deluded, but 
we found both had been so privileged and blessed." 

To our request for Mr. Yates's testimony, Mrs. Yates replied : 

" Mr. Yates perfectly well remembers how myself and the daughter 
who is now living were affected by hearing music that night, such as 
mortals never sang ; but I have to write for him, he being troubled by inca- 
pacity of his right hand." (Signed as correct) " GEORGE YATES." 

The daughter wrote as follows, on Oct. 9, 1884 : 

"31, St. John's Street Road, Clerkenwell, E.G. 

" I can speak with certainty respecting the beautiful music my dear 
mother and I heard on the 26th November, 1870. I shall never forget it; 
we were both afraid to speak, it was so exquisite. . " A. BEILBY." 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Beilby adds : 

" We were living at 3, Henry Street, Pentonville. The two windows 
in the room were shut tight and fastened ; and as near as I can remember, 
it must have been between 2 and 3 in the morning. The music lasted 
several minutes." She further says that, when the sounds began, her 
mother exclaimed, "Anne, do you hear that ? " so that her mother's state- 
ment is not quite exact ; bub she confirms the fact that some hours passed 
before they ventured to describe their impressions to one another. 


The foregoing instances may perhaps suffice to show that a purely 
psychical account of these joint experiences as due either partly or 
wholly to a thought-transference between the percipients is at all 
events possible ; and that acceptance of the phenomena as genuine, i.e., 
as percepts truly described, does not imply any materialistic theory of 
phantasmal beings who travel about through space (sometimes in 
their carriages) on their own account. And possibly a certain number 
of my readers may further agree with me in supposing some, at any 
rate, of these cases to have been in their inception purely subjective, 
and will not feel the need of invoking for them an unknown or 
post-mortem "agency," however little disposed to rule the possibility 
of such agency out of court. I cannot, indeed, deny a certain 
force to an objection which Mr. Myers urges, 1 that we know of 
no instances where a hallucination which can be connected with 
insanity or other distinctly morbid conditions in the person im- 
pressed, and which is thus quite clearly proved to be purely 
subjective, has become collective in the way supposed. But then 
neither do we know of instances where a person in one of these 
morbid conditions has exercised any other form of telepathic in- 
fluence. We have no instances of telepathic impressions of the 
deaths of dying lunatics. The ultimate conditions of telepathic 
agency are as little known to us as the ultimate conditions of telepathic 
percipience ; and transient hallucinations of the sane, such as those of 
the preceding examples, differ so greatly in their nature and ostensible 
conditions from the types of hallucination to which Mr. Myers points 
as never transferred, that it seems rash to assume that they may not 
differ also in the particular point of transferability. At any rate, 
whatever the difficulties of that view, it is one that may be 
provisionally entertained by those who see equal difficulties in any 
other ; and whatever my own surmises as to future discovery may be, 
in the present state of the evidence I feel as much bound here to 
press the theory of thought-transference, before admitting causes of 
an obscurer kind, as in a former chapter to press the theory of 
unconscious physical indications before admitting the reality of 

The degree in which the infectious character may exist is very hard 
indeed to determine ; for the majority of hallucinations (purely sub- 
jective and telepathic alike) occur to persons who are alone silence 
and recueillement being apparently favourable conditions; and we 

1 See pp. 280-2. 


have no means of knowing how many of these hallucinations might 
have been shared by some one else, if some one else had happened to 
be present at the time. All that can be said is that, taking the 
whole class of transient hallucinations of the sane, the cases where the 
experience has been shared by a second person appear to be more 
numerous than those where a second person has been present, awake, 
and rightly situated, and has not shared the experience. Nor, again, 
can I at all adequately explain why these phenomena should be a form 
of mental impression specially liable to spread to neighbouring minds. 
That those of them which are telepathically produced in the first 
instance should have a tendency to spread in this way may appear, 
perhaps, less remarkable, if we remember that a telepathic impulse, as 
such, seems sometimes to have very distinct and peculiar physiological 
effects ; witness Mrs. Newnham's exhaustion (Vol. I., p. 64) in experi- 
ments where the ideas conveyed were in themselves of a quite 
unexciting sort. But as regards the transference in purely subjective 
cases, all I can suggest is that sensory hallucinations, and especially the 
occasional hallucinations of sane and healthy people, are to begin with 
and in themselves very peculiar things ; and that a fresh peculiarity, 
meeting us in something that we do not completely see round 
or understand, is less staggering than if it met us in something 
of which we have held our knowledge to be complete. At any 
rate the fact, if admitted, that purely subjective hallucinations may 
spontaneously become collective, greatly simplifies the consideration 
of the collective cases whose origin is traceable to an external " agent." 
The appearance of an absent person's figure to several spectators at 
once has had in it something specially startling ; and when 
associated with the idea of death, it has almost inevitably sug- 
gested a material or " etherial " spirit an independent travel- 
ling ghost. But as soon as the experience is analysed, it is found 
to involve nothing new or antagonistic to scientific conceptions. 
In being connected with the absent person, it is merely on a par with 
other specimens of telepathy e.g., many of those cited in the 
preceding chapters : in being collective, it is merely on a par with 
other specimens of hallucination e.g., some of those already cited in 
this chapter. Still, though a telepathic impulse from an absent, 
person may not be an essential condition, it may be, and I believe is, 
an exceptionally favourable condition, for a collective hallucination. 
And I now proceed to the final group of examples, of which that 
condition is the distinguishing mark. 



6. I will begin the list with the auditory class. The following 
account is from Mr. J. Wood Beilby, of Redbank Cottage, Elgin 

Road, Beechworth, Victoria. 

"October 17th, 1883. 

(339) " A young lady, a friend of my wife's, staying with us in the bush, 
had gone some hours, on horseback, to our post-town some eight miles dis- 
tant when my wife and I in the house, a servant-man and woman and my 
adopted son, a youth, in an outside kitchen, heard this young lady scream, 
and call out, ' Oh, Johnnie ! Johnnie ! ' that being my boy's name, he 
being a usual attendant to the fair equestrian. All simultaneously rushed 
out ; but nothing further could be heard or seen of the exclaimant for 
nearly an hour, when she arrived, and informed us that at a spot between 
four and five miles distant she had to open a gate. Trying to do this 
without dismounting, she leaned over it from her side-saddle to undo a 
sort of hasp. Her horse took fright at something and bounded aside, 
leaving her, happily, detached from him, hanging over the gate. She said 
she shrieked for help, and fancied ' Johnnie ' was behind, but got extri- 
cated I forget how and her horse caught. She remounted, and came 
on to us without injury but the fright. It was absolutely impossible her 
natural voice could have been heard over a forest country intervening for 
even one-third of the distance. The strange thing to me is that others, not 
so specially gifted with magnetic impressions as I am, should have 
simultaneously and distinctly heard the ejaculation. All instantly acted 
a reply, going out of the several houses which they were in at the time, 
and making for an entrance gate, expecting to find the lady in some 
difficulty close at hand ; and all were astonished that she was not even 
in view upon an extensive plain, skirted by the forest-land she had 
to traverse. " J. WOOD BEILBY." 

Mrs. Beilby corroborates as follows : 

" I perfectly recollect the voice being heard, as narrated above by my 
husband. I vouch for the accuracy of the narration. 


In another account, written on January 28th, 1886, and signed by 
Mr. and Mrs. Beilby, it is more clearly brought out that the young lady, 
Miss Snell, actually called out the name, " Johnnie, Johnnie." The only 
point of difference between the two accounts is that the second, instead of 
saying that all four persons rushed out simultaneously, states that Mr. 
and Mrs. Beilby went out and called to the servants that Miss Snell had 
returned, and that " they said they heard her call, and immediately went 
to the gate of entrance to the homestead," but found no one there. 

Mr. Beilby further adds : 

" The homestead is isolated from any other residence, some 3 miles ; 
and no one was about at the time, except the servants and the employers 
in separate but closely adjacent buildings." He implies that he has had no 
other auditory hallucination. 

The next account, which was first received by the Rev. W. 
Stainton Moses from an intimate friend of the agent's, was revised 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 227 

by his parents, the percipients, who have since again read it over and 
pronounced it correct. 


(340) "About two years ago W. L. left England for America. Nine 
months since, he married, and hoped to bring his wife home to see his 
mother, to whom he was tenderly attached. On February 4th, however, 
he was taken with sudden illness, which terminated fatally on the 12th, 
about 8 p.m. On that night, about three-quarters of an hour after the 
parents of W. L. had retired to rest in England, the mother heard the 
clear voice of her son speaking. Her husband who also heard it, asked 
his wife if it was she who was speaking. Neither of them had been asleep, 
and she replied, ' No ! Keep quiet ! ' The voice continued, ' As I cannot 
come to England, mother, I have come now to see you.' At this time 
both parents believed their son to be in perfect health in America, and 
were daily expecting a letter to announce his return home. A note was 
made of this very startling occurrence ; and when a fortnight since news of 
the son's death arrived, it was found to correspond with the date on which 
the spirit-voice T had announced his presence in England. The widow said 
that the preparations for departure had nearly been completed, and that 
her husband showed much anxiety to get to England and see his mother." 

[Unfortunately the percipients in this case dislike the subject, and it 
has been thought better not to press them with further inquiries. Other- 
wise we should of course have ascertained whether or not they had ever 
had other hallucinations.] 

The next account is from Commander T. W. Aylesbury (late of 
the Indian Navy), of Sutton, Surrey. The case, at first sight, may 
seem as if it belonged to the reciprocal class ; but Commander 
Aylesbury's vision did not include enough detail to justify us in 
regarding it as other than subjective, the scene being apparently such 

as he might naturally have conjured up. 

"December, 1882. 

(341) "The writer, when 13 years of age, was capsized in a boat, when 
landing on the Island of Bally, east of Java, and was nearly drowned. 
On coming to the surface, after being repeatedly submerged, the boy called 
his mother. This amused the boat's crew, who spoke of it afterwards, and 
jeered him a good deal about it. Months after, on arrival in England, the 
boy went to his home, and while telling his mother of his narrow escape, 
he said, ' While I was under water, I saw you all sitting in this room ; you 
were working something white. I saw you all mother, Emily, Eliza, and 
Ellen.' His mother at once said, ' Why yes, and I heard you cry out for 
me, and I sent Emily to look out of the window, for I remarked that 
something had happened to that poor boy.' The time, owing to the 
difference of E. longitude, corresponded with the time when the voice was 

Commander Aylesbury adds in another letter : 

" I saw their features (my mother's and sisters'), the room and the 

1 See p. 48, note. 
VOL. II. Q 2 


furniture, particularly the old-fashioned Venetian blinds. My eldest sister 
was seated next to my mother." 

Asked as to the time of the accident, Commander Aylesbury says : 

" I think the time must have been very early in the morning. 
I remember a boat capsized the day before, and washed up. The mate said 
we would go and bring her off in the morning, but the exact time I cannot 
remember. It was a terrible position, and the surf was awful. We were 
knocked end over end, and it was the most narrow escape I ever had and 
I have had many ; but this one was so impressed on my mind with the 
circumstances the remarks and jeers of the men, ' Boy, what was you 
calling for your mother for 1 ? Do you think she could pull you out of 
Davey Jones' locker,' &c., with other language I cannot use." 

The following is an extract from a letter written to Commander 
Aylesbury by one of his sisters, and forwarded to us, in 1883 : 

" I distinctly remember the incident you mention in your letter (the 
voice calling ' Mother ' ) ; it made such an impression on my mind, I shall 
never forget it. We were sitting quietly at work one evening ; it was 
about 9 o'clock. I think it must have been late in the summer as we had 
left the street door open. We first heard a faint cry of ' Mother'; we all 
looked up, and said to one another, ' Did you hear that ? Someone cried 
out " Mother." ' We had scarcely finished speaking, when the voice again 
called, ' Mother ' twice in quick succession, the last cry a frightened, 
agonising cry. We all started up, and mother said to me, ' Go to the door 
and see what is the matter.' I ran directly into the street and stood some 
few minutes, but all was silent and not a person to be seen ; it was a lovely 
evening, not a breath of air. Mother was sadly upset about it. I 
remember she paced the room, and feared that something had happened 
to you. She wrote down the date the next day, and when you came home 
and told us how near you had been drowned, and the time of day, father 
said it would be about the time 9 o'clock would be with us. I know the 
date and the time corresponded." 

[The difference of time at the two places is a little more than 
7 hours ; consequently 9 in the evening in England would correspond 
with " very early in the morning " of the next day at the scene of the 
accident. But the incident happened too long ago for memory to be 
trusted as to the exactitude of the coincidence.] r T-l 3J 

In the next case, though the sound heard was apparently vocal, 
it was not articulate ; and it can scarcely be pronounced impossible 
that such an effect might be produced by bubbling air, or some other 
local cause. The coincidence, however, appears to have been very 
close, though perhaps not so absolutely precise as is alleged ; and the 
form of impression is not without analogy (see e.g., case 288 above). 
The account is signed by one of the percipients, but is in the words of 
her son, Mr. W. R. Weyer, of 7, Willis Street, St. Paul's, Norwich. 

"June, 1883. 
(342) " At the time that this occurrence took place, my mother's brother 


was lying in a dangerous condition, suffering from a complication of 
disorders, together with an old wound received in the Crimea some time 
previous ; consequently at that time my parents' minds were in a great state 
of anxiety. It was on the night of July 6th, 1865 ; my parents were retir- 
ing to rest at a somewhat late hour, when they were both suddenly startled 
by a sound of three distinct sobs as (according to my mother's experience) 
of a person dying. My father immediately arose, procured a light, and a 
thorough search was made, but with no success. On again retiring, the 
sobs were again repeated, this time in a perfectly clear and distinct 
manner. 1 My mother then noted the time, which was then 10.50 p.m., 
remarking at the same time that we should hear bad news. After making 
another search they again retired to rest, the sobs being heard no more. 

" On the next day my mother received a letter bearing the Chatham 
post-mark, stating that her brother, David Mackenzie Annison, had died at 
Chatham Hospital on the night of July the 5th, at 10.50, being the exact 
time that the sobs were heard by my parents. 

[Signed as correct by Mrs. Weyer, the surviving witness] 


Mr. Weyer, the father, died a year after the occurrence. In answer 
to inquiries, Mr. W. R. Weyer adds : 

" My parents informed my cousin and aunt (who is now deceased) of 
the circumstance, before she received the letter; and my aunt, who is just 
dead, remembered the circumstance quite well. My grandmother often 
used to mention it. I have appealed to my cousin to write her recollection 
of the incident, but I cannot at present persuade her to do so." 

In conversation Mrs. Weyer stated that there were no water-pipes 
near the room, and that the sound seemed startlingly near close to the 
head of the bed. She is not at all predisposed to alarms or fancies, and 
has never had any other hallucination unless we are to reckon as such a 
startling sound of knocks which others also heard, and for which no 
external cause could be discovered. The idea which she expressed that 
the sounds in the present case were premonitory of bad news, since it was 
not founded on any sufficient knowledge of the evidence for telepathic 
occurrences as facts in Nature, indicates, no doubt, an uncritical acceptance 
of marvels. But the only question for us is how far such a habit of mind 
may have affected the evidence to the facts ; and my strong impression is 
that it has not appreciably affected it. We may regard it as probable, 
however, that the sobs were not described as like those "of a person 
dying" until after the fact of the death was realised. 

The following is the result of an independent inquiry as to the time of 

1 As regards the repetition, see p. 105. As to the three sobs, in examining a large 
mass of evidence respecting abnormal phenomena (and especially second-hand accounts), 
one finds this number recurring with somewhat noticeable frequency which at any rate 
suggests unconscious modification of the facts. Nor need we assume any specially 
superstitious habit of mind on the part of the witness, to find it natural that, at the 
points where memory is hazy, slight resulting errors should take lines which are (so 
to speak) marked out for them by literary or religious associations. 


" Melville Hospital, Chatham. 
"July 18th, 1885. 

" In reply to your letter asking to be informed of the exact hour of the 
death of David Mackenzie Annison, I beg to state that there was a David 
Annison, chief stoker, aged 38, admitted into this hospital 26th June, 
1865, from H.M.S. ' Cumberland.' He was suffering from chronic liver 
disease and jaundice. He died at 11.35 p.m., on the 5th July, 1865, and 
his friends took his body away to Sheerness. 

" In case of a death in this establishment, the body is seen by the 
medical officer on duty, who himself notifies on the man's ticket the hour 
and minute of his decease. It was from this document I gathered the 
information you required. BELGRAVE NINNIS, M.D. 

" (Deputy Inspector-General.)" 

With respect to this point, Mr. Weyer writes, on August 7th, 1885 : 

" In reference to the mistake regarding the time, I have consulted my 
mother upon that point, and she asserts that she might possibly be 
mistaken, but of this fact she is most positive, viz., that the time she noted 
on that night exactly corresponded with the time given in the message which 
arrived next day ; this, she says, there is no mistake about. My mother 
felt almost certain that the time was 10.50, but as it occurred so long ago 
she is not likely to have it on record ; therefore she thinks that the medical 
official report would be the most reliable." 

The percipients here are described as having been in great anxiety. 
We have seen grounds for rejecting from the telepathic evidence 
instances where this condition has existed on the part of a single 
percipient (Vol. I., pp. 508-9) ; but where two are affected the case is 
different. For, even if the experience of one was purely subjective 
in origin, it would be extravagant to suppose that of the other to have 
taken place by accident at the same moment ; so that there would at 
least have been a " psychical " phenomenon a transferred hallucina- 
tion. But in the present instance there is some reason for going 
beyond this, and supposing a telepathic origin to the experience. 
For the sort of sound heard is scarcely a likely one for anxiety to 
suggest ; and, moreover, in no case could the hypothesis of a joint 
rapport of the agent with two percipients seem more in place than 
where the two are his near relatives, whose minds are already similarly 
and fully occupied with him. 

I will add a couple of specimens of the non-vocal type. In the 
first, the hallucination presents a curiously close connection with the 
probable idea of the agent at the moment. The account is from Mrs. 

Paget, of Farnham, Surrey. 

"June 5th, 1884. 

(343) " A man-servant, who had lived with us from a child, and who 
was a real friend, fell into a consumption, and thinking that the climate 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES, 231 

of Ventnor might prolong his life for some months, we sent him to St. 
Catharine's Home in September, 1 880. On the 8th of October, I received 
a letter from the Sister-in-charge, saying that Arthur Dunn was decidedly 
worse, but that the doctor thought there was no immediate danger, and 
therefore she did not think I need go to Yentnor at once. I therefore 
wrote to say I would be there on the following Monday, when I hoped to 
be able to stay with him to the last. That morning I said to my girls, 
' I really must remember to speak to the new servant about putting out 
the gas upstairs at half-past 10, for since poor Arthur left us, it has not 
been put out punctually, and even som'e nights the burner close to my 
bedroom and my eldest girl's dressing-room has been alight all night.' 

" That same evening was very warm, and my daughter and myself both 
left our doors open, in order to be able to talk after we went upstairs (the 
gas-burner being close to our rooms). Whilst we were both saying our 
prayers, the clock struck half-past 10, and at that moment we heard a 
man's heavy step along the passage, which stopped at the gas-burner, and 
then we heard the footsteps retiring. Almost at the same moment my 
daughter and myself came to our respective doors and exclaimed, ' Why, 
the man did not put out the gas after all. How like his step sounded to 
poor Arthur's heavy tread.' 

" The next morning I received a telegram from the Sister-in-charge at 
St. Catharine's Home, saying, ' All was over last night.' I went down to 
Ventnor at once to make arrangements, and in telling Sister Mary Martha 
how I grieved that I had not started for Ventnor before, she remarked, 
' We did not think there was immediate danger, and his mind was 
wandering so much that day that he was hardly conscious. It was curious 
to see what form his wandering took, for, after he had been very silent 
for some hours, the clock struck half -past 10, when he raised himself in 
bed and said distinctly, ' The clock has struck, I must go and put out the 
gas,' and fell back and died immediately. 

" I ought to mention that punctuality had been a perfect mania with 
him. He was never, as far as I can remember, three minutes late for any- 
thing he was ordered to do, and he was most devotedly attached to us and 
our home. " FRANCES PAGET." 

Miss Paget (now Mrs. P. Hanham) wrote as follows, on June 11, 1884: 

" I can only most emphatically confirm my mother's statement. I 
distinctly heard the ' footsteps ' as described by her, and it happened at 
half-past 10 at night, the exact time, as we heard afterwards, that our 
poor man-servant died. I may mention that I questioned our new man- 
servant in the morning as to whether he had not been upstairs on the 
previous night ; but it turned out that he had forgotten the orders given 
him to turn out the gas, and had not been upstairs. The footsteps, as I 
remarked at the time, were exactly similar to those of poor Arthur Dunn, 
and you may judge of my surprise when, on my mother's return from the 
funeral, she told us about her conversation with the Sister, who was with 
him at the last, and his last words having been, ' The clock has struck, I 
must go and put out the gas.' 

" In answer to your questions : 

(1) "The occurrence happened here, and it was on October 8th, 1880, 
as I have since found on referring to a diary. 


(2) " Neither my mother nor myself ever remember to have had any 
hallucinations of any sort, before or since. " GERTRUDE F. PAGET." 

[The diary, which I have seen, gives the date of the death only. Miss 
Paget's meaning was that this was fixed on their minds next day as 
having happened on October 8th, on which day as they could not then 
be mistaken in recollecting the sounds had been heard.] 

To a suggestion that the steps might have been those of a heavy-footed 
housemaid, Mrs. Paget replied : 

" I can positively affirm that the housemaid did not come upstairs on 
the night of my servant's death ; for that point was inquired into at the 

The Sister-in-charge at St. Catharine's Home, Ventnor, writes as 
follows, on March 6, 1885 : 

"Arthur Dunn died at 10.30 p.m. on the 8th of October, 1880. I 
was with him when he died ; he was only with us eight days. 

"MATILDA S. S. S. M." 

Mrs. Paget's account having been sent to Sister Matilda, she replied as 
follows, on March 9, 1885 : 

" Arthur John Dunn was only here eight days before his death. I 
nursed him, and was with him when he died on October 8th. I do not 
recollect what Mrs. Paget says at all ; all I can remember was that he 
was in bed three days ; his breathing was very laboured ; he had a weak 
heart ; he was not unconscious at all ; he was a very silent man, and 
seldom spoke, except to answer any question asked. Just before he died 
he asked me the time ; it was half -past 10 ; his words were : ' What is the 
time ? ' I do not think he spoke after. There was nothing about the gas. 
He could not hear any clock strike, for there is not one in the ward or 
near it. Sister Mary Martha was in charge of the house at the time, and 
I had the nursing of the men." 

Sister Mary Martha writes from St. Margaret's, East Grinstead, on 
March 17, 1885 : 

" I regret that I am quite unable to recall any particulars of Arthur 
Dunn's death. I remember the young man perfectly well ; he was at the 
Home only about eight days, and died almost suddenly. He suffered from 
heart disease as well as consumption. He was a very nice fellow, and we 
all liked him much. Mrs. Paget, I remember, spoke in the highest terms 
of him. My impression is that his end was very sudden too much so for 
any last words. SISTER MARY MARTHA." 

[It will be observed that there are two discrepancies between Mrs. 
Paget's and the Sisters' account. The point as to the way in which the 
man ascertained the time whether by hearing the clock strike or by in 
quiry of the Sister is not in itself important : the point about his 
mention of the gas, though not vital, has more importance. I have 
thoroughly talked over the matter with Mrs. Paget and her daughter. 
Mrs. Paget is quite clear in her recollection of Sister Mary Martha's 
statement ; but she does not recollect having heard or realised who it was to 
whom the man made the remark. The daughter is equally clear about her 
mother's mention of this detail at the time. Had there been a consider- 


able interval between Mrs. Paget's conversation with the Sister and her 
narration of it to someone else, it would not be hard to suppose that the 
incident of the man's asking the hour, combined with her own and her 
daughter's experience at that exact time, had gradually led to her 
imagining the crowning detail of his mentioning the gas ; but that this 
detail, if it was not reported to her, should have got immediately im- 
pressed upon her mind as though it had been reported, seems decidedly 
less likely than that it has slipped from the memory of the Sisters, for 
whom it would have no special interest, since Mrs. Paget did not tell them 
what had occurred at home. And there is a further point which tells, I 
think, decidedly in favour of this view. On the supposition that the man 
made the remark about the gas, it is very easy to see how Mrs. Paget 
may have made the mistake about his hearing the clock strike ; for the 
remark would become the fact of interest, and the manner in which the 
man ascertained the time would retain no significance. If, on the other 
hand, the only thing reported to Mrs. Paget had been that the man asked 
and was told what the time was, that would have served completely to 
stamp the coincidence, and to suggest the direction of the man's thoughts, 
and would thus have given a quite sufficient impressiveness and complete- 
ness to the story. Briefly, the introduction of the clock, on the first 
hypothesis, seems more easily comprehensible than the introduction of the 
gas, on the second. 

Mrs. Paget showed me the scene of the incident. The gas burner 
is at the end of a long passage, just outside her and her daughter's 
rooms. The house is a very quiet one, standing in grounds far back 
from the road ; and it is difficult to imagine any sort of real sound 
that could possibly have been mistaken for heavy steps twice traversing 
the length of the passage, the doors of both hearers (it will be remembered) 
being open. Mrs. Paget says, moreover, that Arthur Dunn's tread was 
decidedly peculiar. That the steps were not those of the man-servant for 
the time being was practically proved (apart from his own assertion next 
day) by the fact that the gas was not turned off; for he could have no 
possible duty in that corner of the house at night, except to turn it off ; 
and there was no other man in the house. Mrs. Paget and her daughter 
both confirmed the statement that they have had no other hallucinations. 
They are far from being credulous or superstitious witnesses ; but the 
strangeness of this incident made an extremely strong impression upon 

.In the next case the coincidence seems again to have been close 
to within a very few minutes ; but the form which the hallucination 
(if it was one) took had no special connection with anything that we 
can conceive to have been present to the agent's mind. Bells are, 
however, a not uncommon form of purely subjective impression. 1 And 
if the principle of telepathic hallucinations be granted, one would 
naturally expect that the rudimentary specimens of that class 
specimens which do not suggest any conscious idea of the agent, but 

1 See Vol. i., p. 503, and above, p. 127, note. 


are projected, as it were, blindly under the telepathic impulse should 
follow the ordinary lines of hallucinations in general. The account is 
from the Misses Lafone, of Hanworth Park, Feltham. 

"January, 1884. 

(344) " My sister and I were both much astonished at hearing our church 
bell ring in a loud and hurried manner, at a few minutes before 7.30, one 
evening, when we knew no service was to take place. Our church is 
within 5 minutes' walk across fields, and all the neighbouring churches a 
mile or more off. We talked together of the occurrence, and mentioned it 
at dinner, but did not connect it with anyone in particular. The next day 
we heard an aunt had died at 7.20 the evening before, but did not connect 
the two facts until a few days afterwards, when we made inquiries, and 
found no one had been in the church at the time we imagined the bell to 
be ringing. This took place 19th September, 1883. No one else in the 
house heard the bell." 

The Times obituary confirms Sept. 19, 1883, as the date of death. 

In answer to inquiries, Miss Lafone adds : 

" There was no particular bond of sympathy between my aunt and my 
sister and myself, although we knew her very well. We were aware she 
was seriously ill, but being very much occupied with another subject 
the evening she died, had hardly thought of her at all. We are not 
conscious of ever before experiencing ' auditory hallucinations.' 

"March 18th, 1884. 

" My sister's account of the bells we heard is perfectly correct. We 
were dressing for dinner at 7.30, in different rooms, when I was attracted 
by the sound of the bells, as I supposed from our church, ringing in a most 
eccentric way, and having called to my sister found that she heard them 
too. We discussed the possibility of someone being shut in, as there was 
no service, and the sounds were too irregular and too quick to be tolling for 
a death. We mentioned the subject downstairs, and then forgot it, until 
having heard the following day that our aunt had died at 7.20, just at the 
time we were listening to the bells. We made inquiries as to whether 
anyone had been in the church at the time, but could not find that anyone 
had, or that the bells were heard by anyone besides ourselves. 


[I have been to Hanworth, and realised the relation of the bouse to the 
village church, and also to Feltham Church. There seems to be no 
possibility whatever that the sound heard could have proceeded from the 
latter, or any more distant edifice. Feltham Church lies more than 
a mile to the back of the house ; the intervening space is thickly clothed 
with trees ; and the Misses Lafone's windows look out in the directly 
opposite direction. Miss Lafone does not recall that she has ever so much 
as heard the Feltham bell, even faintly ; whereas the sounds on this 
occasion appeared louder even than those which the neighbouring church- 
bell usually produced. It is extremely unlikely that this neighbouring 
bell should have been rung at this time (on a week-day evening when there 
is never any service), and in this eccentric way ; and it is even more 


unlikely that, if so rung, it should have been unobserved by others. The 
result of my visit is that I find it all but impossible to doubt that the case 
was one of collective hallucination whether connected with the death of 
the aunt or not is of course a different question.] 

I now come to cases where the sense of sight was involved. And 
I may begin with a few specimens where the experiences of the 
several percipients were either not exactly simultaneous or not 
exactly similar, and where, therefore, the theory that they were 
severally derived from the agent receives some slight support. (Com- 
pare in this respect the auditory case, No. 36.) 

In the following example the experience of the second percipient 
included an auditory as well as a visual impression, and was, 
moreover, separated by an interval of 3 hours from that of the 
first. The narrator is Mrs. Cox, who wrote from Summer Hill, 

Queenstown, Ireland. 

" December 26th, 1883. 

(345) " On the night of the 21st August, 1869, between the hours of 
8 and 9 o'clock, I was sitting in my bedroom in my mother's house at 
Devonport, my nephew, a boy aged seven years, being in bed in the next 
room, when I was startled by his suddenly running into my room, and 
exclaiming in a frightened tone, ' Oh, auntie, I have just seen my father 
walking around my bed.' I replied, ' Nonsense, you must have been 
dreaming.' He said, ' No, I have not,' and refused to return to the room. 
Finding that I was unable to persuade him to go back, I put him in my 
own bed. Between 10 and 111 myself retired to rest. I think about 
an hour afterwards, on looking towards the fireplace, I distinctly saw, to 
my astonishment, the form of my brother seated in a chair, and what 
particularly struck me was the deathly pallor of his face. (My nephew 
was at this time fast asleep.) I was so frightened, knowing that at this 
time my brother was in Hong Kong, China, that I put my head under the 
bed clothes. Soon after this I plainly heard his voice calling me by 
name ; my name was repeated three times. The next time I looked, he 
was gone. The following morning I told my mother and sister what had 
occurred, and said I should make a note of it, which I did. The next 
mail from China brought us the sad intelligence of my brother's death, 
which took place on the 21st August, 1869, in the Harbour of Hong 
Korig, suddenly, [of heat-apoplexy]. ':" MINNIE Cox." 

We have received from the Admiralty an official confirmation of the 
date of the death. 

In answer to further inquiries, Mr. Cox (at present Secretary to the 
Naval Commander-in-Chief at Devonport) wrote : 

" February 21st, 1884. - 

" As my wife is too unwell to reply to your letter she has asked me to 
state with reference to your question on the subject of the appearance of 
her brother to her, that : 

" As she has no note now in her possession, and as her mother is 


dead, she cannot be positive as to the hour at which her brother died. 
The circumstance happened about 15 years ago both the persons she 
mentioned it to are dead. All that she can now state positively is that 
she now believes it must have been after midnight when she saw the ap- 
pearance, but at the same time she is quite certain that her little nephew 
came into her room before midnight. She is sure that afterwards, when 
the news came from China, the time corresponded, but has nothing to 
prove it. I fear that she has not sufficient evidence, or in fact any 
evidence now ; but it is an old story she has often told me, and I have not 
the slightest doubt that she did see the appearance. " JAMES Cox." 

In conversation Mrs. Cox told me that she was quite certain of having 
put down the date, and compared it with the date in the letter. She has 
never had the slightest hallucination on any other occasion. The child 
was not in the least given to frights, and had no dread of the dark. 

[If the time either of Mrs. Cox's or of her nephew's impression 
coincided with that of the death, the first date in the account is of course 
given wrongly, as 9 p.m. in England would correspond with about 5 a.m. 
of the next day at Hong Kong. If the first date is right, then the per- 
cipients' experiences must have followed the death by some hours. It 
might be suggested that Mrs. Cox's experience was due to suggestion 
from her nephew. But it is scarcely probable that a person who has no 
tendency to hallucinations should evolve one from what she took to be the 
dream of a frightened child.] 

In the next case, the difference between the several impressions 
was perhaps rather one of degree than of kind. The account is from 
Mr. T. N. Deane, of University Club, 3, Upper Merrion Street, 
Dublin, and was procured through the kindness of the Rev. J. N. 
Hoare, now vicar of Keswick. 

" 1882. 

(346) " In the year 1851, on the 4th of June, I was in a large bedroom 
of a country house in the County Cork. The windows of the room faced the 
River Lee ; both were open. The air was sultry and still ; all the inmates 
of the house were out, with the exception of my wife and an intimate 
friend (now dead), who were with me in the room. We sat on three chairs 
near one of the open windows, and talked on ordinary subjects. The 
old-fashioned four-post bed occupied the side of the room to my right, and 
the only door (which was open) was on my left. We sat into the twilight, 
but there was still sufficient light to recognise each other, and see objects 
pretty clearly. A figure approached me from the side of the room occupied 
by the large bed, and apparently from the side of it, moved directly 
towards me, and placed its hand on my shoulder. It was a female figure, 
but I could not recognise the features. I followed it to the lobby, but did 
not see it again. I returned to my companions, and asked them had they 
seen it. They replied in the affirmative. I said, ' If ever there was a 
ghost, that was one.' That evening my mother was seized with fatal illness. 
Next morning I got a telegram stating that she was in extremis, and for 
hours before was asking for me to be sent for. On receipt of the telegram 
I started for Dublin, and was just in time to see my mother before her 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 237 

death. The first person I met was Mr. Hoare's father [deceased], to whom 
I said, ' My mother will die ! I saw her last night.' " THOS. N. DEANE." 

We find from the obituary in the Freeman's Journal that Lady Deane 
died on June 5, 1851, at Dublin. 

Mrs. Deane writes on March 7, 1883 : 

" I must say I felt the presence more than saw it, and it certainly came 
up to where we (three friends) were sitting, All saw it or felt it ; in fact, 
it was both, for I could describe it as a misty shadow passing through the 
chamber, and went out silently. Of course we did not turn round until 
we all three said, ' Was not there some one near the chair who is gone 
from the room ? ' Then one of our number got up and inquired had any 
one been in, and all were absent from where we were some downstairs in 
other sitting-rooms reading, others in the garden, and the servants at tea 
in their kitchen ; then it appeared doubly odd, and it seized hold of one's 
mind there had been an apparition or vision. We had been talking of the 
lady at the time she appeared to us. " HENRIETTA DEANE." 

In answer to inquiries, Mr. Deane says, " Neither my wife nor I ever 
saw anything of the kind before or since." 

Here the vaguer form of Mrs. Deane's impression, as compared 
to that of her husband, seems a good example of rudimentary or 
arrested development (see p. 73, note). 

The following case is one that would not have been included 
here, but for the favourable opinion which our colleague, Mr. Richard 
Hodgson, formed of the principal witness. The account was written 
down by Miss Atkinson, of Park Head, Jesmond Dene, Newcastle-on- 
Tyne, and is signed by Mrs. Reed, of 7, Miller's Lane, Byker Hill, New- 
castle-on-Tyne, the younger of the two percipients ; the other is dead. 

"July, 1884. 

(347) "It was at Christmas time. Mr. and Mrs. Adams and their 
daughter Annie had been spending the evening with some friends, not far 
from home. Annie (a girl of 12 at the time), along with another girl, was 
sent home to fetch something that had been forgotten. On entering the 
kitchen, Annie said to the other girl, ' See, there's a man sitting by the 
fireside.' The other girl said there was nobody there. The two went up- 
stairs to get what they had been sent for, when Annie said ' There's the 
man again.' x The other girl persisted that there was nobody there. 
Having got what was wanted, they returned to the friend's house. On 
coming home late at night, Mrs. Adams said to her husband' There's my 
brother standing beside that house ; don't you see him, all in white 1 ' 
Mr. Adams did not see him. A day or two afterwards she received a 
letter to say that her brother was killed down the pit, the night and the 
hour corresponding with the time that Annie saw the man (as she said) 

1 For the feature of repetition in visual hallucinations, see cases 159, 160, 184, 213, 
240, 503, 519, 540. In Vol. i., p. 414, second note, I mentioned an example in my collec- 
tion of subjective cases, for which I am now allowed to name Mr. J. Champ, of High 
Street, Chelmsford, as my authority. What he saw (after a fatiguing march) was a gro- 
tesque, parti-coloured figure, about as wide as high, which appeared on the wall of the 
room, disappeared, and re-appeared after an interval of a few minutes. 


sitting by her mother's hearth. Annie had never seen her uncle, as she 
had always travelled from place to place with the regiment, and had never 
been taken to the colliery village where her mother's family lived. 

" This is a correct statement. " ANNIE REED." 

We find from the Register of Deaths that Mrs. Reed's uncle was 
crushed by a fall of stone in the Washington coal mine on December 29, 
1862 ; which confirms the first words of the account. 

Miss Atkinson tells us that Mrs. Adams, unlike her husband, was of a 
superstitious turn of mind. She adds on July 31, 1884 ; 

" I have been to see Mrs. Reed, but cannot say I have gained much 
information. She says that the figure she saw upstairs was the same as 
she had seen sitting by the fireside downstairs. She cannot give any 
definite information about the girl who was with her, except that her name 
was Sophie Arnup, and that she belonged to Norwich, where the incident 
occurred. Mrs. Reed does not know whether she is living or dead, or 
whether married. Mrs. Reed cannot remember that there were any 
differences noted when she and her mother talked about what they had 
seen. She mentioned about the man in white sitting by the fireside, as 
soon as she reached the friend's house where her mother was, and before 
her mother returned. She cannot remember any details about face or 
dress, except that the dress was white ; she was too frightened to observe 
carefully, and I am glad to find she is too truthful to set her imagination 
to work, and fancy she remembers what she does not. This is the only 
hallucination that she ever had. " E. E. ATKINSON." 

Mr. Hodgson writes in September, 1884 : 

"I have talked with Mr. Adams [now resident at 144, High Street, 
Jarrow-on-Tyne], who told me the story as given above. The pit where 
the brother was killed was in the Durham district ; the figure was seen 
at Norwich. I have also seen Mrs. Reed, who first saw the figure, and 
who also told the story as given above. She impressed me as being 
exceptionally truthful." 

[We might conceive that Mrs. Adams' hallucination was due to 
apprehensions caused by her daughter's account. But it will be observed 
that there had been nothing in the daughter's account to suggest Mrs. 
Adams' brother ; the point therefore that Mrs. Adams mentioned her 
brother (which there is no reason to doubt) is important. And even if we 
suppose that she was given to apprehensions about this relative, which may 
have taken a superstitious colour, this would not explain the other hal- 
lucination, unique in her daughter's experience, occurring on the same 
evening. That the impressions were hallucinations and not illusions, is 
strongly indicated by the fact that neither of them was shared by a 
second person whose attention was drawn to the appearance (p. 105, 
second note).] 

In the remaining visual cases, the impression seems to have been 
distinct and identical to all the percipients. I will begin with a case 
where it is a question whether a distant agent was or was not the 
source of the phenomenon ; but where the flashing of the hallucina- 
tion from one of the percipients to the other seems specially well 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 239 

illustrated, since the figure which appeared was one which the 
second percipient had never seen in the flesh. The account is first- 
hand, though written in the third person. It is from Mrs. Elgee, 
of 18, Woburn Eoad, Bedford. 

"March 1st, 1885. 

(348) "In the month of November, 1864, being detained in Cairo, on 
my way out to India, the following curious circumstance occurred to me : 

" Owing to an unusual influx of travellers, I, with the young lady under 
my charge (whom we will call D.) and some other passengers of the outward- 
bound mail to India, had to take up our abode in a somewhat unfrequented 
hotel. The room shared by Miss D. and myself was large, lofty, and 
gloomy ; the furniture of the scantiest, consisting of two small beds, 
place'd nearly in the middle of the room and not touching the walls at 
all, two or three rush-bottomed chairs, a very small washing-stand, and a 
large old-fashioned sofa of the settee-sort, which was placed against one- 
half of the large folding-doors which gave entrance to the room. This 
settee was far too heavy to be removed, unless by two or three people. 
The other half of the door was used for entrance, and faced the two beds. 
Feeling rather desolate and strange, and Miss D. being a nervous person, 
I locked the door, and, taking out the key, put it under my pillow ; but 
on Miss D. remarking that there might be a duplicate which could open 
the door from outside, I put a chair against the door, with my travelling- 
bag on it, so arranged that, on any pressure outside, one or both must fall 
on the bare floor, and make noise enough to rouse me. We then 
proceeded to retire to bed, the one I had chosen being near the only 
window in the room, which opened with two glazed doors, almost to the 
floor. These doors, on account of the heat, I left open, first assuring 
myself that no communication from the outside could be obtained. The 
window led on to a small balcony, which was isolated, and was three 
stories above the ground. 

" I suddenly woke from a sound sleep with the impression that 
somebody had called me, and, sitting up in bed, to my unbounded 
astonishment, by the clear light of early dawn coming in through the 
large window before-mentioned, I beheld the figure of an old and very 
valued friend whom I knew to be in England. He appeared as if most 
eager to speak to me, and I addressed him with, ' Good gracious ! how 
did you come here? ' So clear was the figure, that I noted every detail 
of his dress, even to three onyx shirt studs which he always wore. He 
seemed to come a step nearer to me, when he suddenly pointed across the 
room, and on my looking round, I saw Miss D. sitting up in her bed, 
gazing at the figure with every expression of terror. On looking back, 
my friend seemed to shake his head, and retreated step by step, slowly, 
till he seemed to sink through that portion of the door where the settee 
stood. I never knew what happened to me after this ; but my next 
remembrance is of bright sunshine pouring through the window. Gradually 
the remembrance of what had happened came back to me, and the question 
arose in my mind, had I been dreaming, or had I seen a visitant from 
another world ? the bodily presence of my friend being utterly impossible. 


Remembering that Miss D. had seemed aware of the figure as well as 
myself, I determined to allow the test of my dream or vision to be 
whatever she said to me upon the subject, I intending to say nothing to 
her unless she spoke to me. As she seemed still asleep, I got out of bed, 
examined the door carefully, and found the chair and my bag untouched, 
and the key under my pillow ; the settee had not been touched, nor had 
that portion of the door against which it was placed any appearance of 
being opened for years. 

" Presently, on Miss D. waking up, she looked about the room, and, 
noticing the chair and bag, made some remark as to their not having 
been much use. I said, ' What do you mean ? ' and then she said, 
' Why, that man who was in the room this morning must have got 
in somehow.' She then proceeded to describe to me exactly what I 
myself had seen. Without giving any satisfactory answer as to what I 
had seen, I made her rather angry by affecting to treat the matter as a 
fancy on her part, and showed her the key still under my pillow, and the 
chair and bag untouched. I then asked her, if she was so sure that she 
had seen somebody in the room, did not she know who it was 1 ' No,' 
said she, ' I have never seen him before, nor anyone like him.' I said, 
'Have you ever seen a photograph of him ?' She said, ' No.' This lady 
never was told what 1 saw, and yet described exactly to a third person 
what we both had seen. 

"Of course, I was under the impression my friend was dead. Such, 
however, was not the case ; and I met him some four years later, 
when, without telling him anything of my experience in Cairo, I asked 
him, in a joking way, could he remember what he was doing on a 
certain night in November, 1864. 'Well,' he said, 'you require me to 
have a good memory ; ' but after a little reflection he replied, ' Why that 
was the time I was so harassed with trying to decide for or against the 
appointment which was offered me, and I so much wished you could have 
been with me to talk the matter over. I sat over the fire quite late, 
trying to think what you would have advised me to do.' A little cross- 
questioning and comparing of dates brought out the curious fact that, 
allowing for the difference of time between England and Cairo, his 
meditations over the fire and my experience were simultaneous. Having 
told him the circumstances above narrated, I asked him had he been aware 
of any peculiar or unusual sensation. He said none, only that he had 
wanted to see me very much. 

" E. H. ELGEB." 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Elgee says : 

" I fear it is quite impossible to get any information from Miss D. 
She married soon after we reached India, and I never met her since, nor 
do I know where she is, if alive. I quite understand the value of her 
corroboration; and at the time she told the whole circumstance to a fellow- 
traveller, who repeated it to me, and her story and mine agreed in every 
particular, save that to her the visitant was a complete stranger ; and her 
tale was quite unbiassed by mine, as I always treated hers as a fancy, and 
never acknowledged I had been aware of anything unusual having taken 
place in our room at Cairo. I never have seen, or fancied I saw, any one 
before or since. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 241 

" My visitant, also, is dead, or he would, I know, have added his 
testimony, small as it was, to mine. He was a very calm, quiet, clever, 
scientific man, not given to vain fancies on any subject, and certainly was 
not aware of any desire of appearing to me." 

[This seems at any rate an interesting example of collective hallucina- 
tion ; though as regards its supposed origination in the thoughts of Mrs. 
Elgee's friend in England, one may doubt whether, after a lapse of 4 years, 
complete certainty as to the identity of dates was attainable. If there 
has been an error on this point, the case would properly belong to the 
preceding section.] 

The next account (which has been very slightly condensed) was 
written down for us, in 1883, by the late Miss Katherine M. Weld, 
one of the two percipients, at the request of Mr. James Britten, of 
Isleworth. It proves to be identical with a former account, as to 
which Miss Weld wrote to Mr. Wilfrid Ward, of Sherborne House, 
Basingstoke, on May 19, 1883, as follows : 

" The account was written about 15 years ago ; it was an account 
which appeared in a book and in the newspapers at that time, and which 
I, at the request of friends, revised and corrected. I believe every word 
of the account to be perfectly true, as such things become impressed on 
one's mind ; but at the same time it must be remembered that the account 
was not written at the time, but many years afterwards. Therefore I can 
only say that as far as I remember every detail is exact." 

" The Lodge, Lymington. 

(349) " Philip Weld was the youngest son of Mr. James Weld, of 
Archers Lodge, near Southampton, and a nephew of the late Cardinal Weld. 
He was sent by his father, in 1842, to St. Edmund's College, near Ware, in 
Hertfordshire, for his education. He was a well conducted, amiable boy, 
and much beloved by his masters and fellow-students. In the afternoon of 
April 16th, 1845, Philip, accompanied by one of the masters and some of 
his companions, went to boat on the river, which was a sport he enjoyed 
much. When one of the masters remarked that it was time to return to 
the college, Philip begged to have one row more ; the master consented 
and they rowed to the accustomed turning point. On arriving there, in 
turning the boat, Philip accidentally fell out into a very deep part of the 
river, and, notwithstanding every effort that was made to save him, was 

" His corpse was brought back to the college, and the Very Rev. Dr. 
Cox (the president) was immensely shocked and grieved. He made up 
his mind to go himself to Mr. Weld, at Southampton. He set off the 
same afternoon, and passing through London, reached Southampton the 
next day, and drove from thence to Archers Lodge, the residence of Mr.. 
Weld ; but before entering the grounds he saw Mr. Weld at a short 
distance from his gate, walking towards the town. Dr. Cox immediately 
stopped the carriage, alighted, and was about to address Mr. Weld, when 
he prevented him by saying : 

" ' You need not say one word, for I know that Philip is dead. 



Yesterday afternoon I was walking with my daughter, Katherine, and we 
suddenly saw him. He was standing on the path, on the opposite side of 
the turnpike road, between two persons, one of whom was a youth dressed 
in a black robe. My daughter was the first to perceive them and 
exclaimed, " Oh, papa ! did you ever see anything so like Philip as that is ? " 
" Like him," I answered, " why it is he." Strange to say, my daughter 
thought nothing of the circumstance, beyond that we had seen an extra- 
ordinary likeness of her brother. We walked on towards these three 
figures. Philip was looking, with a smiling, happy expression of counte- 
nance, at the young man in a black robe, who was shorter than 
himself. Suddenly they all seemed to me to have vanished ; I saw nothing 
but a countryman, whom I had before seen through the three figures, 
which gave me the impression that they were spirits. I, however, said 
nothing to anyone, as I was fearful of alarming my wife. I looked 
out anxiously for the post the following morning. To my delight, no letter 
came. I forgot that letters from Ware came in the afternoon, and my 
fears were quieted, and I thought no more of the extraordinary circum- 
stance until I saw you in the carriage outside my gate. Then everything 
returned to my mind, and I could not feel a doubt that you came to tell 
me of the death of my dear boy.' 

" The reader may imagine how inexpressibly astonished Dr. Cox was 
at these words. He asked Mr. Weld if he had ever before seen the young 
man in the black robe, at whom Philip was looking with such a happy 
smile. Mr. Weld answered that he had never before seen him, but 
that his countenance was so indelibly "impressed on his mind that he 
was certain he should know him at once anywhere. Dr. Cox then 
related to the afflicted father all the circumstances of his son's death, 
which had taken place at the very hour in which he appeared to his father 
and sister. Mr. Weld went to the funeral of his son, and as he left the 
church, after the sad ceremony, looked round to see if any of the religious 
at all resembled the young man he had seen with Philip, but he could not 
trace the slightest likeness in any of them. About four months after, he 
and his family paid a visit to his brother, Mr. George Weld, at Seagram 
Hall, in Lancashire. One day he walked with his daughter Katherine to 
the neighbouring village of Chipping, and after attending a service at the 
church called on the priest. It was a little time before the rev. father 
was at leisure to come to them, and they amused themselves meantime by 
examining the prints hanging on the walls of the room. Suddenly Mr. 
Weld stopped before a picture which had no name, that you could see, 
written under it (as the frame covered the bottom), and exclaimed ' Tliat is 
the person whom I saw with Philip ; I do not know whose likeness this print 
is, but I am certain that it was that person whom I saw with Philip.' 
The priest entered the room a few moments afterwards, and was im- 
mediately questioned by Mr. Weld concerning the print. He answered 
that it was a print of St. Stanislaus Kostka, and supposed to be a very 
good likeness of the young saint. 

" Mr. Weld was much moved at hearing this ; for St. Stanislaus was a 
Jesuit, who died when quite young, and Mr. Weld's father having been a 
great benefactor to that Order, his family were supposed to be under the 
particular protection of the Jesuit saints ; also, Philip had been led of late, 
by various circumstances, to a particular devotion to St. Stanislaus. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 243 

Moreover, St. Stanislaus is supposed to be the special advocate of drowned 
men, as is mentioned in his life. The rev. father instantly presented the 
picture to Mr. Weld, who, of course, received it with the greatest 
veneration, and kept it until his death. His wife valued it equally, and 
at her death it passed into the possession of the daughter [the narrator], 
who saw the apparition at the same time he did, and it is now in her 

In answer to some questions put by Mr. Ward, Miss Weld wrote on 
June 20th, 1883 : 

" I will repeat the questions you ask, to make the answers more clear. 

"'Did you as well as your father, think the disappearance strange?' 
No ; I thought no more about it. 

" ' Did your father, before Dr. Cox spoke to him, look upon the 
apparition as significant of some mishap to his son ?' Yes ; he thought 
much about it, and was very anxious for the arrival of the letters the next 
morning ; but he did not speak of the matter until afterwards. He had 
frightened my mother so much on a former occasion that he had promised 
never to speak of such things again." 

Miss Weld adds in another letter : 

" When I saw Philip, I thought no more of it than one does in seeing 
a great and unexpected likeness in a stranger to some absent friend. The 
matter passed out of my mind so completely that I never felt a sensation of 
uneasiness. I did not remember the circumstance until the arrival of 
Dr. Cox, and the announcement of my brother's death. I saw that two 
persons were walking with the young lad who so closely resembled my 
brother. He looked happy and smiling ; but I neither remarked their 
countenance nor dress ; consequently I did not recognise the print in the 
parlour of the priest." 

In answer to an inquiry as to whether this was her only experience of 
a sensory hallucination, Miss Weld adds : " I never before or since the 
event have seen anything from the other world." 1 

The apparition of St. Stanislaus is quite consistent with the tele- 
pathic hypothesis, since we can conceive that the idea of his favourite 
saint may have been actually present to the mind of the drowning 
boy ; but we have no explanation of the third phantasmal figure. 
This, from its irrelevance, is an unlikely feature to have crept into 

1 See p. 48, note. 

The following version of the same incident, which we have received from a Fellow 
of the Royal College of Physicians, is useful as illustrating the slight inaccuracies which 
may creep into a narrative, without the least affecting the essential point : 

" I was mentioning this [i.e., a similar case] to Baron French, or rather we were talk- 
ing over the incidents connected with it, when he told me of a strange occurrence which 
happened at the school where he was, near Ware, in England, a Catholic college, presi- 
dent, a Dr. Cox. There was a boy there of the name of Weld, a very well-known Catholic 
family. This boy was accidentally drowned. The father and mother were at the time at 
Southampton, and on the_ day in question were walking on the quay near the shipping. 
They suddenly saw the said boy approaching, and hurried to meet him, but immediately 
he appeared to fade away, so that they could see the masts of the ships, and through what 
had seemed to be his body. The next day, or the day following, Dr. Cox called on them, 
when Mr. Weld said, ' I know why you are here, it is to tell me that my son is dead. I 
saw him yesterday, and knew then that he had departed.' " 

VOL. II. K 2 


the memory, if not really observed ; but it also makes the hypothesis 
of mistaken identity less improbable than it would otherwise be. As 
against that hypothesis we have the fact that the figures were seen in 
daylight, only a few yards off; that their disappearance seems to 
have been strangely sudden ; and that, if the narrator's memory may 
be trusted as to Mr. Weld's spontaneous recognition of the picture, 
the mistake on his part would have been a double one. Moreover 
it must be observed that even if the case was one of mistaken 
identity of illusion and not hallucination the coincidence remains 
to be accounted for. If we suppose as according to the account I 
think we may that the eyes of the two percipients were indepen- 
dently deluded, and that Mr. Weld's delusion was not merely 
conjured up by his daughter's remark, we cannot ignore the 
improbability of two persons making a mistake of the sort on the 
very afternoon that the relative whom they seem to see is drowned. 
How prodigious this improbability is may be realised from a simple 
computation. Let us suppose surely a liberal estimate that it is 
a common thing, which one may suppose to have happened to each of 
the percipients, to make in the course of life 50 equally remarkable 
mistakes of identity, in an equally" good light and when equally 
near to the figure observed ; and also that the probability that one 
particular relative of most familiar aspect will be the subject of the 
mistake on any one of these occasions amounts to 3*5 which is 
again an extravagant allowance. Let us further suppose that the 
adult life of each percipient amounted to 35 years, or 12,775 days. 
Then, for each percipient, the probability of making one of the 
mistakes of identity on the particular day that the subject of the 
mistake dies is ^0^775 ; and the probability of the supposed combi- 
nation of coincident mistakes is siW . In other words, the odds 
against the occurrence by accident of the incident above related are 
more than 26 millions to 1. If, therefore, the experiences were 
illusions, they may fairly be supposed to have been telepathic 
illusions (see pp. 62-3.) 

We owe the next account in the first instance to Mrs. Willink, of 
Lindale Parsonage, Grange-over-Sands. The three first-hand witnesses 
all appear to be persons of good sense and of some education. Mrs. 
Willink writes, on Sept. 9, 1884 : 

(350) " One night (Friday) my nurse, Jane, came to tell me that they 
had been startled by seeing a ghastly face at the kitchen window. The 
servants had been annoyed for some time previously by some young men 


coming to the kitchen window, and making a noise on the glass, and 
trying to look in. The flower bed under the window had been freshly dug 
up and tidied, and they were hoping the visits had ceased. The dog, 
whose kennel was close to the window, and who had been put on a long 
chain to keep away these visitors, began to howl, and Helen (now Mrs. 
Kobinson), who was sitting so as to see through the edge of the blind, 
looked up, and seeing a ghastly face, which she recognised as Mrs. 
Robinson's, told the others, who got up and drew the blind on one side, 
and so saw the face distinctly. Their account was that it gradually faded 
away below the bottom of the window. Jane and Aggie then went to the 
door, but though the dog continued howling (as he always does when a 
death in the village takes place), they could see nothing. 

" I doubt the accuracy of the statement that the apparition looked at 
Helen rather than at the others ; she sat where she could see through the 
space between the blind and the edge of the window, so naturally saw it first. 
Jane had never seen Mrs. Robinson, but some time after, on looking through 
a photograph-book in the village, she recognised the face, and was then 
told to whom it belonged. When she told me on the Friday evening of 
what they had seen, I rather pooh-poohed the story, as I found that the 
dog's howling was beginning to make them always nervous ; and it was not 
until after service on Sunday that I was told how Mrs. Robinson had been 
persuaded to go to Leeds to the hospital there, and to undergo an opera- 
tion, under which she died on Friday afternoon, I think, between 2 and 3. 
The appearance would be between 8 and 9. Mrs. Robinson had been 
servant to the clergyman here before she married ; she had been away 
from the village some time before her death ; was always an invalid, but 
none of us knew of her being more ill than usual. 


We learn from the clerk at Finsthwaite, where Mrs. Robinson was 
buried, that she died at the Leeds Infirmary on March 25th, 1882, and 
a neighbour thinks that the hour was between 8 and 9 in the morning. 
Friday was the 24th, not the 25th ; and the coincidence was thus not so 
close as Mrs. Willink supposes ; but the interval probably did not exceed 
12 hours. 

Mary Jane Farrand says : 

" It was a Friday evening, of the exact time I am not sure, but it was 
between half-past 8 and 9 o'clock. The other two maids, with myself, 
were sitting at supper in the kitchen, close to the window, when we all 
became conscious of being watched by a woman from the outside, whom 
the other two immediately recognised as a person whom they both knew 
as Mrs. Robinson. Before her marriage, she lived at the parsonage for 
some time as housemaid. She looked intently upon each one, and then 
turned her face quite to the cook, looking slightly reproachful, then 
pleadingly. They asked one of the other where she could be staying, and 
they said it was strange for her to be out (as it rained heavily) without 
her bonnet. One was just about to go and ask her in, when we saw a 
great change come over the face, and it looked like that of a corpse, then 
disappeared altogether. I never saw the person previously, or remember 
ever hearing of her, however indirectly. The following Sunday morning I 
heard that she was dead from Mrs. Willink. The cook, whom we called 


Nell, was married to John Robinson about two years afterwards. As we 
sat at the table I had such an impression of the face, eyes, and front of the 
hair as to be able to recognise the photograph a few months afterwards, 
without the least trouble, or being told. " MARY JANE FARE AND." 

A. Nicholson (now Mrs. Capstick, of Silverdale, Carnforth,) writes to 
Mary Jane Farrand, on September 4th, 1884 : 

" Woodwell. 

"In answer to your letter about the face at the window, I cannot 
remember much about it, except that we were sitting at supper, and Nell 
happened to look up at the window, and said some one was looking in, then 
told us to come and look. It was like the face of a skeleton, and we 
looked, and it was a very thin face, with large staring eyes. We still 
thought it was some one till you and I went to the door, but could see 
nothing. Nell was in the kitchen, and it never moved, but was still there 
when we got back. It seemed to gradually fade out of sight. I don't 
remember who passed the remark that it was like Mrs. Robinson. 


In conversation, Mrs. Capstick stated that she has never had any other 
experience of a hallucination. 

Mrs. Willink writes, on September 18th, 1884 : 

" In answer to your question as to when the servants told me it was 
Mrs. Robinson's face they saw, as far as I recollect it was that same 
evening. Helen knew (as we all did) that Mrs. Robinson was ill, and had 
been so for years with an internal complaint, from which she never could 
recover ; but she did not know that she was any worse than she had been 
before she left the village some months before. 

" They went out next morning to look for footmarks on the flower bed, 
which would have been disturbed by any one standing at the window, but 
there were no traces of any." 

In answer to inquiries, Mary Jane Farrand writes, on September 
24th, 1884: 

" When I recognised Mrs. Robinson's photograph I was staying at 
Arnside with Mrs. Willink's children, and went to visit a person who had 
lived near Lindale and had not long been married, and she it was who when 
showing me the different things in her house, quite by chance took up her 
album, and showed me the photos of her friends, amongst them Mrs. Robin- 
son. I cannot quite remember whether or not I told her that I recognised 
the face ; for it seems so long ago to remember each fact, and I should not 
like to assert what I did not feel confident about, but you certainly may 
write to her to ask her. 

" Never before had I seen anything of the kind, although I had heard 
of similar events, but was greatly wanting in faith with regard to such 
things happening, and thought it but a fancy in others, until I saw Mrs. 
Robinson [i.e., the photograph]." 

She mentions, however, that she has had two subjective hallucinations, 
which fell within a few days of one another one representing Mrs. Willink, 
and the other a fellow-servant. 

Mrs. Jackson Thompson, of Ashmeadow Lodge, Arnside, Grange-over- 
Sands, writes, in February, 1886 : 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 247 

" The only remark I remember Mary Jane Farrand making on the 
late Mrs. John Robinson's photograph was that it resembled the face 
which appeared at the Lindale Parsonage kitchen window. 


[The evidence of " Nell " (now Mrs. Robinson), the third witness, will 
be found in the " Additions and Corrections " at the beginning of this 

The next account is from Mrs. Bennett, of Edward Street, Stone. 

" March, 1882. 

(351) "My daughter, Annie, and I had been drinking tea with the late 
Mrs. Smith and Miss Moore, and talking about their brother Preston being 
very ill and not expected to recover, and were returning home in the 
evening, when between the little wicket which opens out of the Vicarage 
field and Mrs. Newbold's house we met the identical man in face, form, and 
figure, dressed as he was always wont ; slouched hat, old frock coat, open 
in front, knee-breeches and gaiters, with a long stick. He passed so near 
us that we shrank aside to make way for him. As soon as we got to Mrs. 
Newbold's she exclaimed, ' So Preston Moore is dead ! ' when we both 
answered in a breath, ' Oh, no, we have just seen him ! ' 

" We found, in fact, that he had died about half an hour before he 
appeared to us. " J. BENNETT." 

In answer to inquiries, Mrs. Bennett adds, on Dec. 19, 1883 : 

" We cannot call to mind anyone at all resembling the individual in 
question ; his appearance, dress and gait were utterly unlike anyone else 
residing in or about the neighbourhood." 

We learn from the Rev. A. J. Wright, Yicar of Stone, that the death 
occurred on April 13th, 1860. 

The Rev. Samuel Plant writes to us from Weston Vicarage, Stafford : 

"July 8th, 1885. 

" I know very well the lady who, with her daughter, saw the 
apparition of Moore on the day of his death, and I have every reason to 
believe that she would not deviate from the truth in any respect. I have 
several times heard her account of it." 

Mrs. Sidgwick writes, on December 17, 1883 : 

" This afternoon Professor Sidgwick and I called on Mrs. Bennett. She 
told us the story as in her letter, and her daughter, afterwards called in, 
confirmed it. They do not remember when it happened, probably 12 or 
more years ago. She remembers distinctly, and so does her daughter, that 
it was in the summer, and that it was light enough to see things quite dis- 
tinctly though they are not sure of the hour. 1 They had been having tea 
with Mrs. Smith (Preston Moore's sister, a farmer's widow, retired and 
with means), and were on their way to call on Mrs. Newbold, now dead. 
About 3 yards from Mrs. Newbold's gate they saw Preston Moor^ 
coming towards them ; they came round a slight bend in the road, and saw 
him first (Mrs. Bennett said), about the distance across Edward Street 
from them. He and they were both walking on the road close to the 

1 This statement is not incompatible with the fact that the season was really the 
middle of April ; but it will be seen that the " 12 or more years " are really more than 23. 


causeway, and they got on to the causeway and let him pass. He did not 
greet them in any way, but though he did generally touch his hat, and 
say ' Good-day,' he did not then. His not doing so did not seem to them 
odd ; the only thing that did was that a man who they had just heard 
was not expected to recover should be out at all. Mrs. Bennett has often 
wondered since that she did not turn her head to look after him, but she 
did not ; and they do not remember saying anything to each other about 
him, during the few seconds that elapsed before .they got to Mrs. New- 
bold's door. It was a natural enough place to meet him. There is no 
doubt that they both saw him, and that neither doubted at the time that 
what they saw was Preston Moore in the flesh. They say he was a 
peculiar-looking man very plain, and with an eye chronically inflamed ; 
wore habitually a white hat on one side of his head, a loose shabby long 
coat, open down the front, and carried a long, hooked, heavy stick ; and 
all these marks they seem to recognise him by. They took no particular 
interest in him, just knew him. -There was something forbidding about 
him, and he was very odd ; in fact I suppose mad at times. The people 
called him ' moonstruck ;' his sister, Miss Moore, was odd too. He seems 
to have had a sort of interest in Mrs. Bennett, for once he brought her 
pansies, stolen from a neighbouring gentleman's garden, and another time 
cauliflowers equally illegitimately acquired. But he used to take stolen 
gifts to others in the same way. Both Mrs. and Miss Bennett disclaim 
being superstitious or nervous, and neither has had any other visual hallu- 
cination. Mrs. Bennett has had an auditory hallucination of music, and 
also what may have been a hallucination of raps and noises." 

[In this case, we certainly cannot suppose that a purely subjective 
hallucination was independently and simultaneously caused in both 
percipients by their previous talk about the man, in whom they were not 
specially interested. The alternative is, therefore, between telepathy and 
mistaken identity. It was remarked in a former case that recollections as 
to details of appearance are often untrustworthy, as it is easy to imagine 
that one has distinctly seen some familiar figure, when in reality one has 
assumed its presence on the strength of the slightest and most general 
glance. But this criticism scarcely applies here. Preston Moore was the 
last person whom the percipients would at that moment have expected to 
meet out of doors ; and they were, therefore, very unlikely to assume that 
the figure was he, without looking at him attentively.] 

The following case is from Mr. S. S. Falkinburg, of Uniontown, 

Ky., U.S.A., decorator and house painter. 

"Sept. 12th, 1884. 

(352) " The following circumstance is impressed upon my mind in a 
manner which will preclude its ever being forgotten by me or the members 
of my family interested. My little son, Arthur, who was then five years 
old, and the pet of his grandpapa, was playing on the floor, when I entered 
the house a quarter to 7 o'clock, Friday evening, July llth, 1879. I was 
very tired, having been receiving and paying for staves all day, and it 
being an exceedingly sultry. evening, I lay down by Artie on the carpet, 
and entered into conversation with my wife not, however, in regard to 
my parents. Artie, as usually was the case, came and lay down with his 
little head upon my left arm, when all at once he exclaimed, ' Papa ! 


papa ! Grandpa ! ' I cast my eyes towards the ceiling, or opened my eyes, 
I am not sure which, when, between me and the joists (it was an old- 
fashioned log-cabin), I saw the face of my father as plainly as ever I 
saw him in my life. 1 He appeared to me to be very pale, and looked sad, 
as I had seen him upon my last visit to him three months previous. I 
immediately spoke to my wife, who was sitting within a few feet of me, 
and said, ' Clara, there is something wrong at home ; father is either dead 
or very sick.' She tried to persuade me that it was my imagination, bitt 
I could not help feeling that something was wrong. Being very tired, we 
soon after retired, and about 10 o'clock Artie woke me up repeating, 
' Papa, grandpa is here.' I looked, and believe, if I remember right, 
got up, at any rate to get the child warm, as he complained of coldness, 2 
and it was very sultry weather. Next morning I expressed my determina- 
tion to go at once to Indianapolis. My wife made light of it and over- 
persuaded me, and I did not go until Monday morning, and upon arriving 
at home (my father's), I found that he had been buried the day before, 
Sunday, July 13th. 

" Now comes the mysterious part to me. After- 1 had told my mother 
and brother of my vision, or whatever it may have been, they told me the 
following : - 

" On the morning of the llth July, the day of his death, he arose 
early and expressed himself as feeling unusually well, and ate a hearty 
breakfast. He took the Bible (he was a Methodist minister), and went 
and remained until near noon. He ate a hearty dinner, and went to the 
front gate, and, looking up and down the street, remarked that he could 
not, or at least would not be disappointed, some one was surely coming. 
During the afternoon and evening he seemed restless, and went to the 
gate, looking down street, frequently. At last, about time for supper, he 
mentioned my name, and expressed his conviction that God, in His own 
good time, would answer his prayers in my behalf, I being at that time 
very wild. Mother going into the kitchen to prepare supper, he fol- 
lowed her and continued talking to her about myself and family, and 
especially Arthur, my son. Supper being over, he moved his chair near 
the door, and was conversing about me at the time he died. The last 
words were about me, and were spoken, by mother's clock, 14 minutes of 
7. He did not fall, but just quit talking and was dead. 

" In answer to my inquiries, my son Arthur says he remembers the 
circumstances, and the impression he received upon that occasion is 
ineffaceable. " SAMUEL S. FALKINBURG." 

We have procured a certificate of death from the Indianapolis Board 
of Health, which confirms the date given. 

Mrs. Falkinburg writes to us, on Sept. 12, 1884 : 

"In answer to your request, I will say that I cheerfully give my 
recollection of the circumstance to which you refer. 

" We were living in Brown County, Indiana, 50 miles south of' 
Indianapolis, in the summer of 1879. My husband (Mr. S. S. Falkinburg) 
was in the employ of one John Ayers, buying staves. 

1 For phantasms seen in positions which would in reality be impossible compare 
cases 203, 204, and 205. 

2 See p. 37, note. 


'On the evening of July llth, about 6.30 o'clock, he came into the 
room where I was sitting, and lay down on the carpet with my little boy 
Arthur, complaining of being very tired and warm. Entering into 
conversation on some unimportant matter, Arthur went to him and lay 
down by his side. In a few moments my notice was attracted by hearing 
Arthur exclaim : ' Oh, papa, grandpa, grandpa, papa,' at the same time 
pointing with his little hand toward the ceiling. I looked in the direction 
he was pointing, but saw nothing. My husband, however, said : ' Clara, 
there is something wrong at home ; father is either dead or very sick.' I 
tried to laugh him out of what I thought an idle fancy ; but he insisted 
that he saw the face of his father looking at him from near the ceiling, 
and Arthur said, ' Grandpa was come, for he saw him.' That night we 
were awakened by Artie again calling his papa to see ' grandpa.' 

" A short time after my husband started (Monday) to go to Indiana- 
polis, I received a letter calling him to the burial of his father ; and some 
time after, in conversation with his mother, it transpired that the time he 
and Artie saw the vision was within two or three minutes of the time 
his father died. " CLARA T. FALKINBURG." 

Asked whether this was his sole experience of a visual hallucination, 
Mr. Falkinburg replied that it was. Occasionally, however, since that 
time, he has had auditory impressions suggestive of his father's presence. 

Here it may perhaps be suggested that Mr. Falkinburg's hallu- 
cination was due to the child's remark- But I know of no evidence 
to support such a hypothesis. Where sensory hallucinations have 
been traceable to verbal suggestion, as I have already mentioned, 
(p. 188), there has either been a previous abnormal dominance of 
one person by another, or the effect has been worked up among a 
considerable number of people, in an atmosphere of emotion and 
excitement. Till evidence is brought, we must, I think, decline to 
credit the words of a child of five with such magic sway over its 
father's mind as is exercised by a practised mesmerist over the 
" subject " whose will he has annulled, or as causes the visions of a 
hysterical fanatic to spread to her like-minded companions. 

The next case is from Mrs. Fairman, of 43, Clifton Hill, N.W. She 
has given us in confidence the names of the persons concerned, who 
are all dead. The first account sent to us was written on December 29, 
1884 ; but I quote the following slightly fuller one, which was sent 
after a search had been made for the letter therein mentioned. The 
sentence between brackets is taken from the former account. 

"December 4th, 1885. 

(353) "I much regret that the search I have made through my sister's 
letters proved useless. You see, the letter relating to the circumstance 
was addressed to my mother, and has been destroyed long ago. In that 
letter, my sister related the circumstance of both herself and her husband 


seeing what he imagined to be his brother the exact likeness to him 
being apparent passing the breakfast-room window ; so much so that he 
spontaneously jumped up to go to the hall to meet him, but on arriving 
did not see him. (They were at the time as nearly as I can remember, in 
1844 living in the Highlands, and he had parted from his brother, who 
was living in Nottinghamshire, on very unfriendly terms.) After a fruitless 
search in the grounds, he awaited the arrival of the post-bag, which 
contained a letter requesting him to start at once : his brother, whom he 
had not seen for 15 years, being in a dying state. He did so ; and found 
on arrival that he died at the exact time he had seen him pass the window. 
It was on his immediate departure that Mrs. wrote home to us, and 
before she had received tidings from her husband of his brother's death. 
He repeated this statement to me some few years after, and said how 
convinced he was at the time that his brother had arrived, and how kind 
he considered it that he should make the first advances towards a 
reconciliation. " CATHERINE A. FAIRMAN." 

We find from the Register of Deaths that the death took place on 
May 2, 1841, the cause being "effusion on the brain." 

In answer to an inquiry whether she is certain that her sister saw the 
figure, Mrs. Fairman replies : 

" I feel sure that my sister saw a figure pass the window at the same 
time as her husband did ; bnt as she had never seen her brother-in-law, 
she could not say, ' There's Edward.' I remember perfectly her letter at 
the time mentioning that she saw a someone go by." 

[In conversation, Mrs. Fairman told me that she saw, immediately on 
its arrival, the account written to her mother by her sister on the day of 
the occurrence; and if this was so, her evidence is that of a person 
who was made aware of the percipient's experience before the event with 
which it corresponded was known (Vol. I., p. 148). But after an interval 
of more than 40 years, no memory can be trusted as to details of this sort. 
Nor, taking the evidence as it stands, can the hypothesis of mistaken 
identity be absolutely excluded. Still a mistake of the kind is far more 
unlikely in a country place where the aspect of persons who come to the 
house is usually familiar, and where the sudden disappearance of an 
approaching visitor would be very unlikely than in a crowded street. 
See also above, pp. 62-3.] 

The next account is from the late Surgeon-Major Armand Leslie, 
and was first published in the Daily Telegraph. That newspaper, 
during the autumn of 1881, contained a good deal of correspondence 
of this sort ; and Dr. Leslie was one of the few contributors who 
had the good sense and courage to sign his name, and thus to make 
his record available as evidence. We have ascertained from four 
different sources that he used to live at 5, Tavistock Place, W.C. He 
afterwards served through the Russo-Turkish war with the Turkish 
army ; was one of the twelve doctors sent out to Egypt at the time 
of the cholera ; was chief of the medical department of Baker's staff J 


and was killed at the battle of Teb. Unfortunately, we failed to 
identify him till too late, and I can only quote the account as originally 
given. Confirmation might perhaps be obtained from his family, but 
our efforts to trace them have been, so far, unavailing. Not having 
communicated with the narrator, we cannot vouch for the bona fides 
of the account, the very startling incidents of which, and especially 
the detail of the goloshes, are suggestive of a hoax ; and I therefore 
do not give the case an evidential number. On the other hand, it 
seems unlikely that a medical man of repute, even if he took the trouble 
to invent such a story, would allow his name to appear as the authority 
for it in a prominent newspaper. If the story was invented, its final 
sentence, which introduces the writer's true place of residence, is a 
clever touch of realism, and the point made at the end of the second 

paragraph is a master-stroke. 

"October, 1881. 

" In the latter part of the summer of '78, between half-past 3 and 4 in 
the morning, I was leisurely walking home from the house of a sick friend. 
A middle-aged woman, apparently a nurse, was slowly following, going in 
the same direction. We crossed Tavistock Square together, and emerged 
simultaneously into Tavistock Place. The streets and square were deserted, 
the morning bright and calm, my health excellent, nor did I suffer from 
anxiety or fatigue. 

" The following scene was now enacted : A man suddenly appeared, 
striding up Tavistock Place, coming towards me, and going in a direction 
opposite to mine. When first seen, he was standing exactly in front of my 
own door. Young, and ghastly pale, he was dressed in evening clothes, 
evidently made by a foreign tailor. Tall and slim, he walked with long 
measured strides, noiselessly, without a sound 1 a tall white hat, covered 
thickly with black crape, and an eye-glass, completed the costume of this 
strange form. The moonbeams, 2 falling on the corpse-like features, revealed 
a face well known to me that of a friend and relative. The sole and only 
other person in the street, beyond myself and this being, was the woman 
already alluded to. She stopped abruptly, as if spellbound, then rushing 
towards the man, she gazed intently and with horror unmistakeable on his 
face, which was now upturned towards the heavens, and smiling ghastly. 
She indulged in her strange contemplation but during very few seconds, 
and with extraordinary and unexpected speed for her age and weight, she 
ran away with a terrific shriek and yells. This woman never have I seen 
or heard of since, and but for her presence I could have explained the 
incident called it, say, subjection of the mental powers to the domination 
of physical reflex action and the man's presence would have been termed 
a false impression on the retina. 

" A week after the above event, news of this very friend's death 

1 As regards this point, see p. 68, note. 

2 The " moonbeams " and the " morning bright and calm " do not go well together; 
and I certainly shall not argue that a hoaxer would have been careful to avoid the 


reached me. It had occurred on the morning in question. From the family 
I ascertained that, according to the rites of the Greek Church, and to the 
custom of the country he had resided in, he was buried in his evening 
clothes, made abroad by a foreign tailor, and, strange to say, he wore 
goloshes or indiarubber shoes over his boots, according also to the custom 
of the country he died in ; these deaden completely the sound of the 
heaviest footstep. I never had seen my friend wear an eye-glass. He did 
so, however, whilst abroad, and began the practice some months before his 
death. When in England he lived in Tavistock Place, and occupied my 
rooms during my absence. " ARMAND LESLIE." 

[Supposing this to be a genuine case, it is still highly probable that 
some of the detail of the apparition was read back into it, after the real 
facts were known.] 

The lady who sends us the following narrative occupies a position 
of great responsibility, and desires that her name may not be pub- 
lished ; but it may be given to inquirers. 


(354) " When I was eight months old, my mother's younger sister, Mercy 
Cox, came to reside with us, and to take charge of me. My father's 
position at the Belgian Court, as portrait painter, obliged him to be much 
abroad, and I was left almost wholly to the care of my very beautiful aunt. 
The affection that subsisted between us amounted almost to idolatry, and 
my poor mother wept many bitter tears when she came home, to see how 
little I cared for anyone else. My aunt took cold, and for three years 
lingered in decline. I was a quick child, and could read well and even 
play prettily, so that I was her constant companion day and night. Our 
doctor, Mr. Field, of the Charter House, greatly disapproved of this close 
contact, and urged my parents to send me quite away. This was a 
difficult feat to accomplish, the bare mention of the thing throwing my 
aunt into faintings. At last Mr. Cumberland (the theatrical publisher) 
suggested that I should join his two daughters, Caroline, aged 16, and 
Lavinia, younger, at Mrs. Hewetson's, the widow of a clergyman resident at 
Stourpaine, in Dorsetshire, who only took four young ladies. This was 
represented to my aunt as something so wonderfully nice and advantageous 
to me, that she consented to part with me. My portrait was painted, and 
placed by her bed, and I remember how constantly she talked to me about 
our separation. She knew she should be dead before the year of my 
absence would be ended. She talked to me of this, and of how soon I 
should forget her ; but she vehemently protested that she would come to 
me there. Sometimes it was to be as an applewoman for me to buy fruit 
of, sometimes as a maid wanting a place, always she would know me, but 
I should not know her, till I cried and implored to know her. 

" I was but nine when they sent me away, and coach travelling was very 
slow in those days. Letters, too, were dear, and I very rarely had one. 
My parents had sickness and troubles, and they believed the reports that 
I was well and happy, but I was a very miserable, illtreated little girl. 
One morning, at break of day it was New Year's Day I was sleeping 
beside Lavinia. We two shared one little white tester bed, with curtains, 
while Caroline upon whom I looked with awe, she being 16, slept in 


another similar bed at the other end of a long narrow room, the beds 
being placed so that the feet faced each other, and two white curtains hung 
down at the sides of the head. This New Year's morning, I was roughly 
waked by Lavinia shaking me and exclaiming, ' Oh look there ! there's 
your aunt in bed with Caroline.' Seeing two persons asleep in the bed, I 
jumped out, and ran to the right side of it. There lay my aunt, a little on 
her right side, fast asleep, with her mouth a little open. I recognised her 
worked night-gown and cap. I stood bewildered, with a childish sort of 
wonder as to when she could have come ; it must have been after I went 
to bed at night. Lavinia's cries awakened Caroline, who as soon as she 
could understand, caught the curtains on each side and pulled them 
together over her. I tore them open, but only Caroline lay there, almost 
fainting from fright. This lady, Miss Cumberland, afterwards became Mrs. 
Part, wife of a celebrated doctor at Camden Terrace, [and now deceased.] 

" I never talked of what had occurred, but one day, after I had long 
returned home, I said to my mother, ' Do you know, mamma, I saw auntie 
when I was at school 1 ' This led to an explanation, but my mother, 
instead of commenting upon it, went and fetched her mother, saying to 
her, ' Listen to what this child says.' Young as I was, I saw they were 
greatly shocked, but they would tell me nothing except that when I was 
older I should know all. The day came when I learned that my dear 
aunt suffered dreadfully from the noise of St. Bride's bells, ringing in the 
New Year. My father tried to get them stopped, but could not. Towards 
morning she became insensible ; my mother and grandmother seated on 
either side of her, and holding her hands, she awoke and said to my 
mother, ' Now I shall die happy, Anna, I have seen my dear child.' 
They were her last words. " D. E. W." 

No general register of deaths was kept at the time of the incident 
here related ; and we have exhausted every means to discover a notice 
of the death, without success. But we have procured a certificate of 
Mercy Cox's burial, which took place on January 11, 1829. This is quite 
compatible with the statement that the death was on January 1 (though 
such an interval, even in winter, is no doubt unusual), as the lady was 
buried in a family vault, and probably a lead coffin had to be made. 
January 1 would be, at the very least, a day of very critical illness. As 
to the date of the apparition, the marked character of New Year's 
Day decidedly favours the probability that Miss W.'s memory is correct. 

In answer to inquiries, Miss W. says : 

"I was born in 1819. The death of my aunt took place in 1829. 
Though to my most intimate friends as Sir Philip Crampton, the late 
Earl and Countesses (2) of Dunraven, 1 I have often mentioned the 
event, (and to Judge Halliburton,) I think I never wrote it fully except 
for Lord Dunraven and his mother, in 1850, who were very desirous to 
publish it, but I declined. I think that a great reason I have always had 
for not talking of it was the awe with which it inspired my mother, and 
her strict commands that ' I should not mention it to anybody.' Then, 
too, I went to school and lost sight of Lavinia Cumberland, and I shrank 
from the comments of strangers." 

1 The present Lord Dunraven tells us that he does not remember to have heard his 
father mention the circumstance. 


In conversation Miss W. added that she had never experienced any 
other hallucination ; also that the Cumberland girls had visited her home, 
and seen her aunt which accounts for Lavinia's recognition of the figure. 

[We learn, through a relative of Miss Lavinia Cumberland (now Mrs. 
Monarch, of 16, Regent's Park Road, N.W.), that she herself does not 
recall the incident ; but that she remembers several times hearing her 
sister, Mrs. Part, speak of a " ghost case " in which they had both been 
somehow concerned.] 

This case, depending on the narrator's memory at 31 of what occurred 
when she was under 10, is not, of course, a strong one evidentially. 
But the very fact that the experience recorded is of so striking a 
kind makes it more probable that it was remembered than that it 
was unconsciously invented. The very odd detail of Lavinia's 
being the first to see the figure seems peculiarly unlikely to have 
been wrongly imagined afterwards ; for it is a feature that would 
have had no natural part in any sentimental idea of the child's about 
her aunt's visiting her, and could only tend to detract in her mind 
from the emotional significance of the visit. We have, moreover, the 
tolerably complete assurance that the incident deeply impressed our 
informant's mother at the time ; for this attitude of a third person, 
and the injunction of silence to which it led, are even more unlikely 
than the original experience to have been the product of the child's 
fancy. It must, however, be observed that the second hallucina- 
tion may have been due to Lavinia's verbal suggestion ; and that 
the minute details of the appearance (which could hardly have 
been so suggested) may have been subsequently imagined. It is 
possible, therefore, that the case, though telepathic, may not have 
been truly collective. It cannot with any certainty be reckoned 
as reciprocal, as there is no evidence that the aunt's " seeing of her 
dear child " was more than a dream or a subjective impression 
(see p. 156). 

In Dr. Leslie's case (supposing the account to be substantially true) 
one of the percipients was presumably a total stranger to the agent. 
In No. 354, the one of the two persons present who was least 
intimately connected with the agent was the first to see the 
phantasm ; but equally in this as in the former case, I should regard 
her experience as dependent on the presence of the more nearly 
connected person (see 7 below). In the next example there is a 
yet further step ; and of the two persons present, one of whom was son, 
and the other a stranger, to the agent, the stranger alone saw the 


phantasm, though both seem to have shared in a singular auditory 
experience which they connected with it. The incident thus closely 
resembles that described in case 242, where the phantasm appeared 
not to the dying man's sister, but to a servant who was with her. The 
narrative was copied by the present writer from a note-book of the 
Rev. J. A. Macdonald, formerly of Manchester, and now of Rhyl. 

(355) " On August 13th, 1879, I sailed to Hamburg with Captain 
Ayre, of the ss. ' Berlin,' of Goole, who related to me that, about 25 years 
before, he was staying with a friend named Hunt, at a small farmhouse at 
Arming Grange, about 2 \ miles from Goole. On a summer evening, about 9 
o'clock, Captain Ayre and his companion went to their bedroom, when they 
both heard a noise at the side of the house, and both went to the window to 
see what was the matter. The captain distinctly saw a man walking outside, 
but Hunt could see nothing there, though he had heard the tramp of feet 
as well as the captain. Being astonished that Hunt could not see the man, 
Captain Ayre proceeded to describe him. He was a man of short stature, 
with a stoop, and wore knee breeches, a red-fronted waistcoat with sleeves, 
and a little black hat. Hunt instantly identified the description as 
answering exactly to his own father. Captain Ayre assured me he had 
never seen Hunt's father. After this the men went to bed, and both now 
heard a noise as if the end of the bedstead had been wrenched, which 
continued until about midnight, when Hunt's brother arrived on horseback 
from Gilberdyke with the news of their father's death, which occurred 
about three hours earlier that evening. The noises then ceased." 

Mr. Macdonald adds : 

" This was taken down by me in pencil from Captain Ayre's own lips, 
and transcribed when I returned from the voyage. The pencil account 
was read over to Captain Ayre, and pronounced by him to be perfectly 
correct. I cross-examined him carefully on every point. He specially 
described the lonely position of the house, and the unlikelihood of any 
stranger moving about in the vicinity or creating a disturbance in the 

This account was sent to Captain Ayre, who replied : 

"SS. ' Dresden,' Goole. 

" November 4th, 1884. 

" I have carefully read over the narrative, as given by the Rev. Mr. 
Macdonald ; but it is so accurate in every detail that I fail to be able to 
add anything thereto. " CHAS. AYRE." 

[Our efforts to trace Mr. Hunt have been unsuccessful. Captain Ayre 
has not heard of him for some time.] 

In the next case the agent was not dying, but was in a somewhat 
alarming fainting-fit. We have had several other similar cases (e.g., 
Nos. 20 and 110) ; they recall what was said above (p. 26) as to the 
number of the death-cases where the mode of death has been drowning. 
The narrator is Mr. H. G. Barwell, of 33, Surrey Street, Norwich. 



(356) " During the last week of July, 1882, Mr. and Mrs. W. and family 
had settled themselves comfortably in a house they had hired at the Lizard, 
Cornwall ; and a few days later Mr. Cox, an amateur artist from Liverpool, 
joined them. Mr. Barwell arranged to meet Mr. Earle, an artist residing 
in London (both of whose names are appended), on Monday, 7th August, 
1882, dine with him and together take the night mail at Paddington, 
booking for Penryn, Cornwall, the station from whence conveyances take 
passengers to Helston, and thence to the Lizard, whither they were going 
to join Mr. W. and family, as on many former occasions. 

"Barwell and Earle therefore started according to arrangement by the 
8.10 p.m. mail train from Paddington, on the evening of Bank Holiday, 
Monday, 7th August, 1882. They travelled all night; the train on 
arrival at Penryn was a little more than 15 minutes late, reaching there 
on Tuesday morning, 8th August, 1882, at 7.23 a.m. No other passengers 
alighted there from that train. They had some difficulty in getting a 
porter to convey their luggage to the omnibus standing at the station, the 
driver of which announced that if they could not come at once, he must 
start without them. Passengers were nothing to him, he had to take 
charge of and deliver the mail bags at various villages on his route. They 
roused up the porter and insisted on his attention ; in the meantime their 
train had departed and another train, from Falmouth to London, ran into 
the station (due 7.24 a.m.) Their luggage was being placed on the 
omnibus ; Earle had already climbed to his seat next the driver,' and 
Barwell, having now seen all their luggage safely deposited on the vehicle, 
was climbing up next him, when Earle exclaimed : ' Why, look there ! ' 
And on Barwell looking up, he saw in the train, just leaving the 
station for London, their friend W. from the Lizard, waving his hand to 
them while eagerly stretching his head out of the window to ascertain, 
apparently, if they had arrived. They both cordially returned the salute 
and the train disappeared round a curve, W. still looking out of the window 
waving his hand. 

" The two friends now made various conjectures as to the why and 
wherefore of W.'s departure on the very morning of their arrival ; they 
considered it very disappointing that he should thus be obliged to leave, on 
the day our friendly party was about to be reunited. Earle was greatly 
depressed about it, and wished to leave all further discussion on the subject 
until they should ascertain from Mrs. W. the cause for his leaving the 
Lizard just before their arrival. Amongst the surmises which they made 
for W. being in the train which came from Falmouth, and not from the 
Lizard where he was staying, was this ; that he had probably received at 
the Lizard, on Monday, the 7th August, a telegram requiring his immediate 
attendance in London or elsewhere, and that to prevent a very early start 
by trap on Tuesday morning from the Lizard to catch the 7.30 a.m. train 
to London at Penryn, he had made use of a return Bank Holiday excur- 
sion steamer from Falmouth to the Lizard ; sleeping at Falmouth, and 
starting by train from there at 7.15 a.m. for London, namely, the train 
they saw him in. 

" They arrived in due course at Helston, had breakfast, and sauntered 
about the old town tiL the next coach started for the Lizard at 11 o'clock 
a.m. On nearing the Lizard, they were anxiously on the look-out for the 

VOL. n. a 


children of Mrs. W., to receive their usual hearty and sincere welcome on 
arrival of the coach, and to learn from them where their respective domiciles 
in the village had been chosen. The coach arrived, but none of the W. 
family were to be seen. 

" The luggage was taken off the coach and left on the village green in 
front of the hotel, till information could be obtained as to where rooms had 
been engaged. The two friends strolled away, but soon met W.'stwo boys, 
who on being asked why their father had gone away, seemed somewhat 
surprised at the question, and replied that their father was lying ill at his 
lodgings, and that their mother was also at home and very anxious about 
him. The boys accompanied Earle and Barwell to their father's house in 
the village, when Mrs. W. came out and greeted them cordially, telling 
them briefly that Mr. W. had had a serious fainting fit that morning, and 
that she was watching him with considerable anxiety. 

" Mr. Cox now came in from his morning's work, and after the 
exchange of salutations with Earle and Barwell, related to them the 
following details of Mr. W.'s fainting fit : That he, Mr. W., and his two 
boys started from the Lizard village to Housel Cove to bathe, at 7 o'clock 
that morning, a distance a little over half a mile. When W. came out of 
the sea, and was leaning against a rock, in a sitting posture, he fainted 
quite away. Cox was dreadfully shocked and alarmed, for at one time he 
could discover no action of the heart, and he feared he might be dead or 
dying. He used all the means he could think of, and placed W. in a more 
recumbent position, which seemed a more favourable one, for pulsation 
was then discernible, and W. partially recovered, but was too weak to 
move for a long time. Mrs. W was fetched, and then breakfast was taken 
down to the Cove, and when vitality and strength had sufficiently returned 
to enable W. to climb the steep ascent with assistance, they started home. 

" The fainting of W. occurred at 7.30 a.m. at Housel Cove, the Lizard, 
at the precise time when Earle and Barwell saw W. waving his hand to 
them from the train at Penryn. 

" The question has been put to Mr. W. whether he thought of or saw 
Earle or Barwell, either just before or during his seizure, but he remembers 
nothing of the kind. 

' "CHARLES EARLE, 9, Duke street, Portland Place, 
/q- j\ London. 

\ g 11 / " H. G. BARWELL, Surrey Street, Norwich. 

" CHARLES H. Cox, Shrewsbury Road, N., Birkenhead." 

In reply to inquiries, Mr. Bar well says, "Both Earle and I have 
very good sight. My impression is that the person I saw looking from the 
train window wore a soft, flexible, round hat." He can recall no other 
experience of hallucination, except one which occurred many years ago, at 
a time when he was not yet fully recovered from a severe fever. 

Mr. Cox writes, on January 2nd, 1885 : 

" I was at the Lizard, in Cornwall, when my friends, Earle and 
Barwell, saw (as they believed) the ' double ' of my friend W., whom, at 
the time, 1 was instrumental in bringing round after his attack of illness. 
My part in the affair was simply resuscitating Mr. W. from a very serious 
condition. " C. H. Cox." 


[Here, again, mistaken identity must be recognised as a possibility ; 
but there are several points which combine to make it improbable. The 
fact which the appearance forced on the minds of the two friends namely, 
W.'s departure was so little in accordance with their expectations that it 
distinctly surprised them ; they were thus in a wholly different attitude 
from that (say) of awaiting a friend's arrival, when the senses are on the 
alert for anything at all resembling him. Again, the figure seen seems to 
have given unmistakeable signs of friendly recognition ; so that we should 
not only have to suppose that the percipients mistook someone for their 
friend, but that they mistook for him someone who was known to them, or 
at any rate to one of them clearly a much more unlikely occurrence. It 
will be observed, moreover, that the difficulties of assuming a mistake as to 
identity are immensely increased where two persons with good sight would 
have had to share in it (see p. 244). Still, it is conceivable though 
scarcely compatible with the account that the first sign of recognition 
was given by Mr. Earle ; and that a stranger, seeing this sign, returned it, 
either in joke, or imagining that the giver of it must be some one that he 
had known and ought to recognise.] 

I will conclude with a case which is probably the best-known 
specimen of the sort on record, and on that very account may 
naturally be mistrusted, as having " won its way to the mythical." 
The following presentation of it is, however, very much more 
complete than any that has yet been published, and is of a better 
quality than is often procurable for so remote an incident. It is true 
that, of the two percipients, we have the evidence of one only at 
second-hand, and of the other at third-hand ; but we have the first- 
hand evidence of a person who was informed of their experience 
immediately on its occurrence, and long before the news of the agent's 
death arrived. 

(357) The following memorandum made by General Birch Reynardson, 
of the account given him by one of the percipients, was sent to us by Mr. 
Wm. Wynyard, of Northend House, Hursley, Winchester. He believed 
the original document to be in the library of Mr. Chas. Reynardson, of 
Holywell Hall, Stamford, who, however, has looked for it without success. 
A copy 1 was made on June 20, 1864, by Mr. Wynyard's father, General 
E. Bi Wynyard (a brother of George Wynyard, the co-percipient,) who 
says that the writer of the memorandum put it on paper as soon as he had 
an opportunity after the conversation recorded therein. General E. B. 
Wynyard has headed the paper : 

" Memorandum of a conversation between the late General Birch 
Reynardson, and Colonel, afterwards Sir John, Sherbrooke." 

" In the month of November, Sir John Sherbrooke and General Wyn- 

1 This copy was enclosed in a letter to Colonel F. Clinton, of Clinton Ashley, Lyming- 
ton, Hants. We have not actually inspected it ; but Colonel Clinton's daughter transcribed 
it for General E. B. Wynyard's son, Mr. W. W. Wynyard, who kindly sent us the book 
in which he in turn had copied it. It is curious that General E. B. Wynyard seems never 
to have heard the narrative first-hand from his brother. 

VOL. II. S 2 


yard 1 were sitting before dinner (between 5 and 6 o'clock) in their barrack 1 
room at Sydney Cove, in America. It was duskish, and a candle placed on 
the table at a little distance. A figure, dressed in plain clothes and a good 
round hat 2 on, passed gently between the above people and the fire. 
While passing, Sir J. Sherbrooke exclaimed, ' God bless my soul, who's 
that ? ' Almost at the same moment Colonel W. said, ' That's my brother, 
John Wynyard, 3 and I am quite certain he is dead.' Colonel W. was 
much agitated, and cried and sobbed a great deal. Sir John said, ' The 
fellow has got a devilish good hat, I wish I had it.' 4 They immediately 
got up (Sir John was on crutches, having broken his leg), took a candle, 
and went into the bedroom, into which the figure had entered : they 
searched the bed and every corner of the room to no effect ; the windows 
were fastened up with mortar. Mr. Stuart, the paymaster of the regiment, 
noted the circumstance at the time. Sir John told me that Colonel W. 
for two or three days was a good deal distressed and uneasy, but remained 
most perfectly convinced of the death of his brother. 

" They received no communication from England for about five months, 
when a letter from Mr. Rush, 5 the surgeon, announced the death of John 
Wynyard at the moment, as near as could be ascertained, when the figure 
appeared. In addition to this extraordinary circumstance, Sir John told 
me that two and a-half years afterwards he was walking with Lilly Wyn- 
yard 6 in London, and seeing somebody on the other side of the way, he 
recognised, he thought, the person who had appeared to him and Colonel 
Wynyard in America. Lilly Wynyard said that the person he pointed 
out was a Mr. Eyre ; r that he had always been considered so like John 
Wynyard that they were frequently mistaken for each other ; and that 
money had actually been paid to this Mr. Eyre in mistake." 

The following account appeared in Notes and Queries for July 2nd, 
1859, in a letter signed "Eric." 

" On the 23rd of October, 1823, a party of distinguished big-wigs were 
dining with the late Chief Justice Sewell, at his house on the esplanade in 
Quebec, when the story in question became a subject of conversation. 
Among the guests was Sir John Harvey, Adjutant-General of the forces 
in Canada, who stated that there was then in the garrison an officer who 
knew all the circumstances, and who, probably, would not object to answer 
a few queries about them. Sir John immediately wrote five queries, 
leaving a space opposite to each one for an answer, and sent them to 
Colonel Gore, who, if my memory serves me rightly, was at the head of 

1 Note by Mr. W. Wynyard. " Colonel W. and Colonel S., then serving in the 23rd 
[?33rd] Regiment as Captains. (?) Oct. 15th, 1785." We learn from General Edward 
Wynyard, another son of General E. B. Wynyard, that George Wynyard died in 1809, as 

2 I cannot help thinking that this article of apparel may be the progenitor of the very 
suspicious hat of the Warren Hastings legend, criticised in Vol. i., p. 152. The two 
narratives have been probably often told in juxtaposition. 

3 General Edward Wyuyard tells us that John Wynyard was a subaltern in the 3rd 

4 Note by the Rev. J. Birch Reynardson, son of the writer of the memorandum, and 
brother-in-law of Mr. W. Wynyard. "He told my father that he made this remark, as 
hats were not to begot there, and theirs were worn out." 

B Note by Mr. W. Wynyard. " Surgeon of the Coldstream Guards." 
6 Note by Mr. W. Wynyard. " L. W. was brother of Colonel W., and died in the 
West Indies, Adjutant of the 20th Regiment." 
T Note by Mr. W. Wynyard. " (?) Hay." 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 261 

either the Ordnance or the Royal Engineer department. The following is 
a copy of both the queries and the answers, which were returned to Sir 
John before he and the other guests had left the Chief Justice's house : 

" ' My dear Gore, 

" ' Do me the favour to answer the following : 

' Queries. 

" ' 1. Was you with the 33rd Regiment when Captains Wynyard and 
Sherbrooke believed that they saw the apparition of the brother of the 
former officer pass through the room in which they were sitting ? 

" ' 2. Was you not one of the first persons who entered the room, and 
assisted in the search for the ghost 1 

"'3. Was you not the person who made a memorandum in writing of 
the circumstances, by which the singular fact of the death of Wynyard's 
brother, at or about the time when the apparition was seen, was 
established 1 

" ' 4. With the exception of Sir J. Sherbrooke, do you not consider your- 
self almost the only surviving evidence of this extraordinary occurrence 1 

" ' 5. When, where, and in what kind of building did it take place? 

f { mi i ' (Signed) J. HARVEY. 

' Thursday morning, 

"'23rd October, 1823.' 

' Answers. 

" ' 1. Yes, I was. It occurred at Sydney, in the Island of Cape Breton, 
in the latter end of 1785 or 6, between 8 and 9 in the evening. We were 
then blocked up by the ice, and had no communication with any other part 
of the world. < R.G. 

" ' 2. Yes. The ghost passed them as they were sitting before the fire 
at coffee, and went into G. Wynyard's bed-closet, the window of which 
was putted (sic) down. 1 ' R.G. 

" ' 3. I did not make the memorandum in writing myself, but I 
suggested it the next day to Sherbrooke, and he made the memorandum. 
I remembered the date, and on the 6th June our first letters from England 
brought the account of John Wynyard's death on the very night they saw 
his apparition. ' R.G. 

" ' 4. I believe all are dead, except Colonel Yorke, who then com- 
manded the regiment, and is Deputy-Lieutenant of the Tower, and I 
believe Jones Panton, then an ensign in the regiment. ' R.G. 

" ' 5. It was in the new barracks at Sydney, built the preceding 
summer, one of the first erections in the settlement. 

' (Signed) RALPH GORE. 

" ' Sherbrooke had never seen John Wynyard alive ; but soon after 
returning to England, the following year, when walking in Bond Street 
with Wm. Wynyard, late D. A. General, and just after telling him the 
story of the ghost, [he] exclaimed "My God/" and pointed out a person 
a gentleman as [being] exactly like the apparition in person and dress. 
This gentleman was so like J. Wynyard as often to be spoken to for him, 
and affected to dress like him. I think his name was Hayman. 

" ' I have heard Wm. Wynyard mention the above circumstance, and 
declare that he then believed the story of the ghost. ' (Signed) R.G.' 

" The above is taken from a copy made from the original queries and 

1 " Query, puttied down, to exclude the cold ? " 


answers, and given to me, only a few weeks after the date affixed to the 
queries ; and to it is added, in the handwriting of the copyist, the 
following : 

" ' A true copy from the original. The queries are written in black ink 
in the handwriting of Sir John Harvey, Deputy Adjutant-General of 
British America, and signed by him ; the answers are in red ink, written 
and signed by Colonel Gore. The original paper belongs to Chief Justice 
Sewell. Sir J. Sherbrooke was lately Governor-General of Lower Canada. 1 
It is said that Sir John Sherbrooke could not bear to hear the subject 
spoken of.' 

" The copyist was a near relative of the Chief Justice, and died in 
1832. He was one of my most intimate friends." 

[There is a discrepancy between Colonel Gore's and Sir J. Sherbrooke's 
accounts, as to which of the Wynyard brothers accompanied Sir J. Sher- 
brooke in Bond Street. The detail as to the Bond Street incident following 
immediately on a narration of the story looks like an unfortunate addition, 
the only effect of which is to inspire distrust, probably quite undeserved, of 
the rest of the statement.] 

It is much to be regretted that the gentleman who sent this account 
to Notes and Queries did not sign his name. It is, however, highly 
improbable that Colonel Gore's statements are forgeries ; and we are 
justified, I think, in regarding them as genuine by the following account, 
received from a niece of his, Miss Langmead, of Belmont, Torre, Torquay. 

" September 3rd, 1883. 

" Colonel Gore, of the 33rd, married my mother's sister, and he 
narrated the story to my mother and to my elder sister himself, most 
emphatically. I have heard it from them both, over and over again, and 
my sister wrote the account some years ago. She heard Colonel Gore tell 
it more than once, and always with strong feeling, which impressed every 
word on her memory. I have not got her paper now, but I knew it 
perfectly by heart. I have often heard my sister say that no one who 
heard Colonel Gore tell the story could doubt the powerful impression 
made on him at any rate. 

" There were other little particulars, such as the impossibility of hiding 
in the barrack rooms, which were two above and two below, and so 
slightly built that every sound was heard, but I have not enlarged more 
than I could help. The story has been printed with variations in many 
books of collected ghost-stories, but not always correctly. It is usually 
said that it was a twin brother who was met in Bond Street, but that was 
not the case. 

" It was in the time of the American war, and some of our troops were 
in winter quarters at Cape Breton. The weather was very severe and the 
harbour frozen over. The ships expected from England had not arrived, 
and the supplies had run short, especially the allowance of wine. Four 
officers, afterwards entitled General [mistake for Colonel] Wynyard, Sir 
John Sherbrooke, Sir Hildebrand Oakes, and Colonel Gore, of the 23rd 
[? 33rd] Regiment, were in barracks at the top of a steep ascent, guarded 
by a sentry below. They had dined together and then separated, two of 
them being engaged upstairs in looking over maps and plans of the seat 

i " From July, 1816, to July, 1818." 

xvm.] - COLLECTIVE CASES. 263 

of war. The other two, General Wynyard and Sir J. Sherbrooke, remained 
in the inner room. 

" Suddenly an exclamation from General Wynyard startled the two 
above, who ran downstairs, expecting that the ice had broken and the 
looked-for ships arrived. They found Sir J. Sherbrooke alone, standing 
amazed, and in. answer to their eager inquiry as to what had happened, he 
said that a gentleman, a stranger to him, had come in at the door, looked 
fixedly at General W., and passed into the inner room. General W. exclaimd 
aloud, ' Good God, my brother Jack ! ' and followed him into the bed- 
room, from which there was no outlet. He presently returned, much 
agitated, having found no one. Colonel Gore took out his watch and 
marked the time, while another of the party ran down to the sentinel, who 
declared no person had passed. Sir J. Sherbrooke described the figure as 
dressed in a hunting costume, such as he had never seen, with a hunting- 
whip in his hand. Days went on, the ice broke up, news came from 
England to General W. of his brother's death, who was killed in the 
hunting-field at the very time in which the figure appeared in the barrack- 
room. Papers also came out, containing the fashions, one being the 
hunting suit with a particularly shaped boot, such as the figure had worn. 
After the peace, and the troops had returned to England, Sir John Sher- 
brooke 'was walking through Bond Street with Colonel Gore, when he 
stopped and said, pointing to a man who was coming towards him, ' There 
is the figure I saw at Cape Breton.' Colonel Gore replied, ' That man was 
called Jack Wynyard's double, he was so very like him.' 

" Before Sir J. Sherbrooke's death, long afterwards, he was asked by a 
friend what he then thought of the apparition at Cape Breton. He replied 
that he could not explain it, but that every detail was true. 

" M. F. L." 

[Here the hunting-dress, and the corresponding detail about the 
hunting-field, may almost certainly be referred to a transformative process 
in Colonel Gore's mind. The peculiar boot may probably be a degenerate 
representative of the spruce hat in Sir J. Sherbrooke's account. It would 
further be a very natural mistake on the part of Colonel Gore's niece to 
imagine that he was Sherbrooke's companion in the walk in Bond Street.] 

Next come two items of evidence, for which George Wynyard, the co- 
percipient, was the original authority. 

General Edward Wynyard, of 5, Portman Street, W., writing to us on 
April 7, 1885, tells us that the incident was narrated to him by his aunt, 
Mrs. Wright, who " had often heard the story " from her brother, George 
Wynyard. He observes that her narrative corresponded in nearly every 
particular with the account given in Chambers' Book of Days, Vol. II., 
p. 448. The said account (the authority for which is not given, save in so 
far that a relative of George Wynyard had pronounced it substantially 
true,) agrees in the essential points with Colonel Gore's j 1 but differs in, 
stating that the subsequent recognition took place when Sherbrooke was 

1 Miss Browne wrote to us on Jan. 18, 1884, from Farnham Castle, Surrey, to the 
effect that she too had heard the incident described by Mrs. Wright, and also by " General 
Sir George Nugent, who was in the garrison at the time " ; and that the details were very 
similar to those in Miss Langmead's account. 


walking with two gentlemen, in Piccadilly, and that he actually accosted 
the gentleman, who told him that he was Wynyard's twin-brother. These 
are precisely the sort of inaccuracies most likely to creep into a story in 
its passage from mouth to mouth. 

The Rev. O. H. Gary, of Tresham Vicarage, Chudleigh, wrote to our 
friend, the Rev. A. T. Fryer, on April 3, 1882 : 

" The story, as my mother, who heard it from Wynyard himself, used 
to tell it, was as follows : General Sherbrooke and Mr. (or General) 
Wynyard were sitting together in a hut in Canada (or Nova Scotia or 
elsewhere in North America) when a figure entered the tent and passed 
through into an inner apartment, whence there was no means of exit except 
where they were sitting. Wynyard recognised the figure as that of his 
brother, but thought someone was playing practical jokes, as he knew 
his brother to be in England at the. time. On searching the inner room 
the figure was found to have disappeared. 

" They had both seen the figure. The brother died at that time. Some 
years afterwards, the same two officers were walking together in London, 
when Sherbrooke saw a man on the opposite side of the street, and said, 
' Look, there is the man that we saw in the tent.' Wynyard replied, ' No, 
that is not my brother, but he is so like him that my brother was once 
arrested for debt in mistake for him.' " 

[Here again we have characteristic illustrations of the way in which 
narratives become modified in transmission. " The same two officers " is 
of course neater and easier to remember-than " one of the same officers 
and a brother of the other " ; and the " arrest for debt " seems to be an 
oddly inverted reminiscence of the detail mentioned by Sir J. Sherbrooke, 
that " money had been paid to one in mistake " for the other.] 

In conclusion, the following letter appeared in the Daily Telegraph of 
October 20, 1881: 

" SIR, In reference to the circumstances related as occurring in Sir 
John Sherbrooke's tent, in North America, permit me to add that I heard 
an exactly similar account of it in Dublin about the year 1837, by 
General D'Aguilar, then on the staff, and who, I think, had been one of 
the occupants of the tent. 1 Colonel ' Wynyard's ' name, who was on the 
Dublin staff at the time, was also mentioned. Yours truly, 


7. The cases of the preceding section, and of 2, though not 
evidentially among the strongest in our collection, are sufficient, I 
think, to establish a strong presumption for the genuineness of this 
collective type of telepathic hallucination. But the establishment of 
facts, in " psychical " as in other departments of Nature, may far out- 
strip our power of satisfactorily accounting for them ; and such 
account as I can render of these phenomena is here put forward rather 
as a suggestion or adumbration than as a final view. 

1 This does not appear in any other account. Complete information as to various 
details could only be obtained by a search in the archives of the War Office. It is hoped 
that in course of time this search may be authorised. 


To begin with, it would, I think, be irrational not to recognise a 
special significance in the fact that in all the cases of 6, and most 
of those of 5, the several percipients were together : to that extent, 
at all events, conditions of place seem to enter vitally into the pheno- 
mena. But there is nothing in this that need drive us for a moment off 
idealistic or " psychical " ground. I have spoken often, throughout the 
book, of a rapport between the parties concerned in a psychical trans- 
ference meaning by the word simply some pre-existing psychical 
approximation which conditions the transference. The rapport has 
usually been that of kinship or affection. But I regard these 
collective cases as strongly indicative of a rapport of a different sort 
consisting not in old-established sympathy, but in similarity of 
immediate mental occupation. I suspect that such a rapport might 
be induced by a common environment by partnership in that 
particular piece of the " life of relation " within which the hallucina- 
tion happens to fall. That is to say, I should regard the fact that 
B's hallucination spreads to C, when B and C are in the same place, 
as possibly largely due to the fact that a very important part of the 
contents of B's and C's minds is and has been for some hours, 
minutes, or moments preceding identical. The local condition would 
be, not any physical presence or centre of influence in the circle of 
space outside them, but the community of scene, and of other 
objective impressions, in the two parallel currents of ideas which are 
their real two existences. 1 It must be remembered that we have no 
a priori means of knowing what the mental conditions that favour 
telepathy are likely to be. And I venture to think that if, by some 
process of psychical chemistry, the elements and affinities of different 
minds at particular moments could be analysed and estimated, mere 
community of scene and of immediate sensory impression might count 
for more might prove, that is, to involve a larger amount of real 
correspondence or identity than the external and accidental 
character of such passing experience might have led us to expect. 

But this idea, if tenable, seems capable of being extended. If 
community of environment opens a channel of supersensuous com- 
munication between B and C, we come to conceive a greater fluidity 
(so to speak) in the directions of telepathic transference than the. 

1 A similar explanation may be suggested for the fact that thought-transference 
experiments rarely succeed when agent and percipient are so far withdrawn from one 
another as to have quite different environments. This fact would otherwise seem 
explicable only by some hypothesis of " brain- waves " diminishing in strength with the 
increase of the distance between the parties a hypothesis which has the disadvantage of 
being quite inapplicable to many of the facts of spontaneous telepathy (Vol. i., p. 112). 


more usual cases of a distant agent and a single percipient could 
reveal. And this brings me to what I suspect to be a more correct 
account of the collective telepathic cases that have been passed in 

In the earlier part of this chapter, I consulted clearness by keeping 
separate the hypothesis (1) of joint and independent affection of B and 
C by A, and the hypothesis (2) of C's affection by B who alone is 
directly affected by A. Now looking back at these hypotheses in the 
light of the evidence, the objections (see 2) to the assumption of 
independent psychical affection of B and C by A come back on us 
with only increased force. As long as telepathic hallucinations are 
rare, and lead by their rarity to the conclusion that they generally 
require not only an abnormal condition of the agent, but specific 
susceptibility in the percipient, nothing can make it seem otherwise 
than astonishing that two closely similar specimens of them, in con- 
nection with the same agent, should independently concern two 
percipients at the same moment. One might admit such an 
astonishing coincidence once or twice I have suggested its applica- 
tion to a few cases in 2 above ; l but. it seems impossible to lay it 
down as a principle of explanation, by which any number of 
collective hallucinations may be accounted for. No view which 
shrinks from assuming a local and physical presence of A, and at 
the same time rejects every sort of direct transference between B and 
C, can avoid this difficulty ; and the consideration seems to me of 
such weight as to exclude hypothesis (1) in the form stated. I feel 
absolutely driven to suppose that where C's experience resembles B's, 
it is in some direct way connected with B's ; this is the only alter- 
native that I can see to admitting a physical basis to the percept. 
But this does not necessarily imply the adoption of hypothesis (2) in 
its crudest and most obvious form ; the " direct way " need not, I 
conceive, be a transfer between B and C wholly unconnected with A 
a transfer, that is to say, which must have equally taken place had 
B's hallucination been purely subjective. Though the evidence in 
5 above inclines me strongly to the opinion that sensory hallucina- 
tions, as such, are transferable things, I do not believe this to be the 
complete explanation of the later telepathic cases. And I now 
venture to suggest that with slight modification the two hypotheses 
of joint affection by A, and of direct transference between B and C 

1 In all of these, however, where the two percipients were near together and had been 
sharing the same life, I think it probable that the experiences were not truly independent. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 267 

may be amalgamated ; and that the amalgamation is really more 
probable than either hypothesis in its isolated form. 

Where A, the distant agent, is in rapport both with B and C, 
it is possible to suppose that B and C are jointly and independently 
impressed by A, though the particular form the hallucination in 
which they simultaneously embody their impression is still an effect 
of B's mind on C's, or of C's on B's. The joint impression from A 
may be conceived as having in itself a tendency to facilitate this 
farther effect that is to say, psychical communication between B and 
C may find a readier and wider channel at the exceptional moments 
when they are attuned by a common telepathic influence than, e.g., 
when one of them is staring at a card and the other is endeavouring 
to guess it. But even for these cases, I think it so dangerous, 
in view of the apparent rarity of " psychical " affections, to assume 
any sort of independent psychical affection of different minds at 
the same moment, that I should prefer to regard A's influence on 
C as derived through B. And this certainly commends itself as the 
process where C is a stranger to A, or not a person whom it would 
have seemed natural that A's vicissitudes should in any way affect. 1 
In such cases I conceive that, while C's experience depends on B's 
presence or existence, and even probably on the form of B's experience 
when the two are similar, yet A's influence may really and truly 
extend to C ; that in fact there is a rapport between A and C, 
established ad hoc by the rapport of both of them with B. B would 
be thus not the instigator, or not solely the instigator, but the channel, 
of C's percipience the assumption being that a mind in which B 
holds a prominent place, such as C's, may be abnormally susceptible 
to an influence which abnormally impresses B. Especially would this 
conception relieve the difficulty of such extreme cases as Nos. 242 and 
355, above ; where B's part in the occurrence was to all appearance 
suppressed, and C, a stranger to A, was the sole percipient. 2 We can 
scarcely doubt that the presence of B, the near relative of the supposed 
agent, was a condition of C's percipience ; while at the same time it 
seems absurd to suppose that B infects C with a sensory hallucination 
which he himself does not experience. We seem driven, then, to 
regard B as a mere channel of influence ; and that is a part which, 
there is no absurdity in supposing to be played unconsciously. For 

1 E.g., cases 169, 264, 279, 339, 348, 350, 353, 354, 357. 

2 See also case 307, where A's bond, such as it was, was with B and not with C ; and 
compare case 311. 


the better established tacts of telepathy have familiarised us with 
both unconscious reception and unconscious propagation of telepathic 
impulses ; and however unexpected, it is at least quite conceivable 
that the two events should take place as part of a single process 
which is all that the transmission of an impulse from A to C through 
the unwitting B implies. 

The above view, of rapport through community of mental occupa- 
tion, may likewise afford some explanation of the otherwise puzzling 
cases where the telepathic influence exercised by A seems itself to 
have depended rather on local than on personal reasons ; as in case 29 
in Chap. V., where the agent's form was seen by a person only 
slightly connected with her, in a spot in which she was known 
to have been considerably interested ; l or in cases where the 
actual percipient had little or no connection with the agent, but was 
situated in a place where the agent might naturally conceive some 
other and nearly-connected person to be ; 2 or in cases where a dying 
person's form is alleged to have been seen by strangers in that person's 
old home; 3 or in a converse case in Chap. III. of the Supplement, 
3 Miss G.'s veridical dream of the death of a comparative stranger 
in her own old home. It is not necessary that two persons 
should know one another, for certain daily scenes and local impressions 
to be deeply stamped in common on their two minds ; and in this 
way locality might constitute an ideal bond between A and B who 
are apart, as we conceived that it might do between B and C who are 

An even further extension could be given to this idea, if we admit 
the supposition that A's own susceptibility may be quickened, in the 
way that was so strongly suggested by some of the reciprocal cases in 
the preceding chapter. I there pointed out (pp. 161-2 and 164) the 
indications afforded of a special sort of clairvoyance ; telepathic, in the 
sense that it depends on B's living presence in the scene which A 
perceives ; but independent in the sense that B and his surroundings 
are perceived while B's own state is not critical but normal the 
abnormality of state being confined to A, whose extension of faculty 
in trance or at death makes him percipient of B, as well as the agent 
of B's percipience. A view akin to this has been developed by Mr. 
Myers, in the Note that follows a few pages further on ; and the 

1 It is probable that a local explanation would apply to cases 239, 248, 313, 343, 350, 

2 E.g., Nos. 192, 225, 660, as well as No. 242 just mentioned ; and compare No. 307. 

3 E.g., case 666. 

xviii.] COLLECTIVE CASES. 269 

temptation to apply it to the collective cases is considerable, since it 
enables us to conceive the scene, and the sense of being present there, 
as common to the minds of A, B, and C alike ; and so far as such 
community is a favourable condition for telepathic affection, it would 
explain A's power to affect the other two. 1 To some ioint hallucina- 
tions, however, {e.g., cases 327, 328, 329, and perhaps 348, where A, 
the original of the phantasm, has been in a normal waking state at 
the time, such an explanation seems quite irrelevant ; and its admis- 
sibility elsewhere must, I think, depend on our obtaining more proof 
than we yet have of A's reciprocal percipience, in collective cases 
which are clearly due to his agency. The reciprocal type having 
seemed, on the evidence, to be a rare if not a doubtful one, we ought 
to be doubly cautious of making it the ground of explanation for 
further and more perplexing phenomena. 

1 I do not think herein differing from Mr. Myers that the mere fact of A's clair- 
voyant perception of the scene, even if established, would account for the similarity and 
simultaneity of the two resulting affections, so as to enable us to dispense with the 
hypothesis of a direct dependence of one of them on the other. Strong evidence seems 
needed, before we can assume the particular mental events involved in A's clairvoyant 
perception to be more calculated than any other abnormal events of his experience such 
as simply dying in his bed at home to impose a particular hallucination on several minds 
at once. However much his clairvoyant perception of B and C and their surroundings 
may be supposed to facilitate his impressing them, why should the two independent 
impressions, which according to telepathic analogy might take many different forms, be 
projected by B and C in the same form? 

While therefore I can accept, for certain cases at any rate, Mr. Myers' description of 
the appearance of A to B as proximately dependent on A's "perception of his own 
presence " in, or his " psychical translation " to, the scene where his phantasm is 
observed for this is practically identical with the suggestion made above (p. 162) that an 
"extension of A's susceptibility in a certain direction has involved the power to act 
abnormally in the same direction " I cannot go on to admit that it is " a subsidiary 
question," depending on varying degrees of susceptibility to telepathic impressions, 
whether the phantasm is seen by B only, or by a whole group of persons. To do this 
would seem tome to be transferring to the terms " perception of presence " and "psychical 
translation " some of the connotation of physical presence and translation. 

Mr. Myers would obviate this objection by the further supposition that the aspect of 
A which B and C perceive is derived in detail from his mind and not theirs which would 
no doubt be a convenient way of accounting for the similarity of their hallucinations. But 
in the first place, I fail to see any ground for connecting this supposition (as Mr. Myers 
connects it) with the previous hypothesis of A's clairvoyant presence at the place where B 
and C are. The supposed derivation would clearly have to be from an unconscious or 
sub-conscious part of A's mind ; for there is no more reason for supposing his conscious 
thoughts to be concentrated on his own aspect when he is clairvoyantly perceiving a 
scene, than when he is consciously lying in bed and perceiving his normal surroundings in 
a normal way. And so far as any conscious occupation of the mind may be supposed 
to throw into abeyance any assumed mental activities of a more latent kind, one would 
expect that A's interest in the friend or friends whom he is psychically visiting would be 
specially calculated to thrust into the background his sub-conscious sense of his own 
aspect ; so that the difficulties (Chap, iii., 9, and Chap, xii., 8) which in any case are 
involved in the hypothesis that A's mind transfers to B the detailed image of his aspect, 
are rather increased than relieved by supposing him clairvoyant at the time. . 

And, in the second place, this hypothesis of detailed derivation from the agent's 
mind, as applied to collective cases, seems to me in itself open to grave doubt. We have 
encountered, no doubt, an important group of cases (Chap, xii., 8) in which certain 
details of a phantasmal appearance did seem to be literally derived from the agent's 
mind, and not simply projected by the percipient from his own resources. But those 
who admit the psychological continuity of dreams and hallucinations on which I have 
laid so much stress, and who have marked at every stage the ways in which the 


And indeed any conjectural explanations of these more outlying 
telepathic phenomena have, I am well aware, an air of rashness and 
unsoundness. This may very likely be due to their being really 
rash and unsound ; but it may also possibly be due to the fact that 
our view of the field before us is still very partial and dim. The duty 
of caution in all evidential matters does not exclude the duty of 
keeping the mind open to new conceptions on this threshold of new 
knowledge, and not allowing any hypothesis that has provisionally 
commended itself to become a rigid barrier, within which further 
facts must be forced or else disallowed. And if our central thesis 
stands if " psychical " transferences from mind to mind be admitted 
as in rerum naturd the rashness, I think, would be in attempting 
to set a limit to the possible implications of this admission. Its 
tendency, at any rate, is to give a tangible meaning to that solidarity 
of life which Idealism proclaims ; to lead us to regard individual 
minds, not as isolated units, but as all in potential unity as entering 
into a scheme whose relation to the telergic influence somewhat 
resembles that of the physical world to electricity. And in such a 
scheme we need not be surprised if the manifestations of action and 
affinity between the parts are as sudden and shifting, and to the 
superficial view as isolated, as in the physical world those of electrical 
relations between different pieces of matter. But a far larger basis of 
well-attested cases is, no doubt, needed before reflections of this sort 
can be profitably pursued ; and I will not further run the risk of 
inverting the relation of speculation to evidence which it has been 
throughout my endeavour to maintain. 

percipient's mind seems independently to react upon and develop the telepathic impres- 
sion, may incline to regard these literal representations as the exception rather than the 
rule ; and may hesitate to extend the hypothesis of visual images transferred (so to speak) 
in a full-fledged condition, to cases where the percept included nothing that the percipient's 
memory or imagination might not well have supplied. Moreover, in some of the collective 
cases themselves, the evidence of dissimilarity in the percepts seem sufficient to show that 
the percipient minds were no mere tabulae rasas for a foreign image. But a much more im- 
portant observation with respect to the " collective " evidence here presented is this that 
(putting aside the second-hand record, No. 670, where the description of details cannot 
be safely relied on) in not a single case have any such special features of dress or aspect 
as must perforce be derived from the mind of the distant A been simultaneously perceived 
by B and C. It is only in case 653, and in the dubious narrative quoted on p. 252, that 
such features are alleged to have been perceived even by B ; and there is no proof what- 
ever that C on those occasions was aware of them. This, in my view, is just what was to 
be expected. For if it is indicated, as the general result of the telepathic evidence, that 
the most dominant form of agency and the most definite and detailed form of transfer are 
extreme rather than normal forms, it would scarcely be conceivable that in case after case 
a double exhibition of them should occur, and A's sub-conscious sense of his own aspect, by 
two independent manifestations, be reflected in a faithful picture of him before the eyes 
of two persons at once. 


1. IN bringing to a close the principal division of this work the 
presentation of the case for spontaneous telepathy as supported by 
a considerable body of first-hand records it will scarcely, I think, be 
necessary to attempt anything like a summary of the foregoing 
chapters. It is indeed impossible effectively to summarise facts the 
whole force of which lies in their cumulation. One point only I 
would once again emphasise the one with which I started to wit, 
that radical connection between experimental and spontaneous 
telepathy, the importance of which in my own view I may best 
express by saying that I am unable even to guess what effect the 
body of testimony to the latter class of cases would have on me, were 
I not convinced of the reality of the former. This being understood, so 
far as the evidential position of the subject admits of a brief connected 
statement, I have endeavoured to state it in the closing pages of the 
fourth chapter. Neither there nor subsequently have I extenuated the 
evidential shortcomings of many of the spontaneous cases ; but for the 
evidence taken as a whole, it may be claimed that it resembles not so 
much a shifting shadow, which may be left to individual taste or 
temperament to interpret, as a solid mass seen in twilight, which it 
may be easy indeed to avoid stumbling over, but only by resolutely 
walking away from it. The temptation to walk away from it to 
dismiss it with a hasty glance will be very strong. The matter 
presented is from a literary point of view monotonously dull, from a 
scientific point of view confusingly inexact : the study of it in detail 
is hard work, while at the same time it is work which affords none of 
the stimulus of high intellectual activity. Yet it is only by detailed 
study that my colleagues and I have arrived at our own view ; and so 
far are we from putting ourselves into antagonism to the sceptical 
attitude of Science, that we should regard any conclusion formed 
without such study as premature. On this still dubious territory, a 


number of direct and independent attestations, which would be utterly 
superfluous elsewhere, will be or ought to be demanded ; and 
others will need, as we have done, to have the true nature and amount 
of the evidence far more distinctly brought home to them than is 
necessary in realms already mastered by specialists to whose dicta 
they may defer. 

But in point of fact, the dulness of the work in detail scarcely 
needs apology ; for it would never be specially remarked except in 
connection with that totally unscientific view on which I commented 
at the very opening of the treatise. The whole subject of psychical 
influences has been mixed up in the public mind with ideas of the 
supernatural or uncanny with nervous thrills and spurious excite- 
ments. When such associations are carefully excluded, the details of 
the inquiry cannot be expected to have more, and may perhaps have 
not much less, attraction than those of the recognised physical 
sciences. And so far as the unexciting character of the present 
collection poor in thrills, but tolerably rich in verified dates 
tends to make this sober view prevail, it will be a direct 
advantage. For, exactly like the physical sciences, the research 
has to go on, methodically, not sensationally ; and it has only just 
begun to be methodised. The present instalment of facts, though 
probably solid enough to surfeit those who are not troubled by 
a priori difficulties, and to repel the mere seeker after marvels, 
cannot be expected to convince every reasonable searcher after 
truth ; and no one (as I have remarked before) can fix the precise 
amount of testimony which a candid mind is bound to regard as 
adequate. And we accept this view of the position rather as an 
incentive than as a discouragement. For we are fortified by the 
belief that it is not so much the necessary material, as the combined 
effort to render it available, that has hitherto been lacking. Even the 
record now presented, as I have pointed out, is drawn from the com- 
paratively small number of persons who have heard of our existence, 
and much of it from the limited circle of our own acquaintance. We 
are justified, therefore, in regarding the area hitherto explored as but a 
corner of a very much larger field, which may be gradually swept ; 
and the very flaws in the present collection will have had their use, if 
they direct attention to the true standard of evidential requirements, 
and if through them future telepathic incidents stand a better chance 
of being caught at the critical moment, while the opportunities for 
investigation are complete. 


2. The commoner difficulties which hamper progress may, more- 
over, be expected largely to disappear, as time goes on. As the idea of 
Telepathy becomes understood, the difference will be more and more 
realised between facts which make for it and facts which do not ; 
aid towards the establishment of some strong item of proof will not 
so often be refused on the ground that no proof is needed that every- 
body has had presentiments fulfilled, or has occasionally guessed what 
his friend was thinking of; and efforts will be more profitably directed 
through the mere existence of a scheme into which the results may fall. 
And further, a rational public spirit in the matter may be trusted to 
develop. The reluctance to give any prominence to what are often 
legitimately regarded as very private experiences will gradually give 
way, when it is recognised that the significance of each item of 
evidence, even as matter for private contemplation, depends on the 
combination of many items ; and among those who take this wider 
view, fewer will shrink from the direct attestation which alone can 
ensure the result that they profess to desire, and which they would 
readily give to any other sort of fact in heaven or earth that they truly 
believed in. As for the merely negative difficulties the general 
grounds of objection to our work we see them already diminishing 
from the mere spirit of the age. The set of that spirit is very observably 
towards a wider tolerance a distrust of finalities and restrictions, 
by whatever party imposed, and a faith in free inquiry, wherever it 
may lead. Men are already ceasing to argue that the alleged facts 
did not happen because they could not happen ; or that telepathy 
is perhaps not true, and, therefore, if true, is not important ; or 
that the recognised paths of labour, along which steady progress is 
being made and may still be made to an unpredictable extent, are 
so various and abundant that it is mere trifling to desert them for a 
dubious track, where progress, even could it be supposed possible, 
would still be a useless anachronism. 

3. But though "psychical research" is certain in time to surmount 
ridicule and prejudice, and to clear for itself a firm path between easy 
credulity on the one side and easy incredulity on the other, the rate of 
its advance must depend on the amount of sympathy and support that , 
it can command from the general mass of educated men and women. In 
no department should the democratic spirit of modern science find so 
free a scope: it is for the public here to be, not as in anthropological 
researches the passive material of investigation, but the active partici- 



pators in it. We acknowledge with warm gratitude the amount of 
patient assistance that we have received how patient and forbearing in 
many instances, none can judge who have not tried, as private 
individuals, to conduct a system of strict cross-examination on a wide 
scale. But unless this assistance is largely supplemented, our under- 
taking can scarcely hold its ground. Its interest must not for a moment 
be supposed to be of the merely curious sort, sufficiently illustrated in a 
loose batch of more or less surprising facts ; indeed, so far as the facts 
excite surprise, it is a proof that the work is only beginning. If the 
natural system includes telepathy, Nature has certainly not exhausted 
herself in our few hundreds of instances : that these facts should be 
genuine would be almost inconceivable if she had not plenty more 
like them in reserve. And here is the practically interesting point ; 
for, till the general fact is universally admitted, the several items of 
proof must ever tend to lose their effect as they recede further into the 
past. This peculiarity of the subject cannot be gainsaid, and must be 
boldly faced. For aught I can tell, the hundreds of instances may 
have to be made thousands. If the phenomena cannot be com- 
manded at will, the stricter must be the search for them : if they are 
exceptionally transient and elusive, all the greater is the importance 
of strong contemporary evidence. The experimental work needs to 
be, and easily might be, enormously extended : for many a year to 
come the spontaneous phenomena must be as diligently watched for 
and recorded as if each case stood alone in its generation. And 
whatever the defects of the present attempt, so far as it supplies an 
impulse or lends an aid in either of these directions, it will not 
have failed in its object. 

* # * I should be glad to extend my statistics of sensory hallucinations in 
general, by canvassing another known number of persons taken at random. (See 
Chap. XIII.) Readers who may feel disposed to help me in this matter, and 
who will write to 14, Dean's Yard, S.W., will receive the necessary forms and 
instructions. But apart from a special census, I should be grateful for accounts 
of such phenomena from any persons who have themselves had experience of 
them. The assurance that they are not things to be troubled about, and are 
compatible with perfect bodily and mental health, may perhaps remove any dis- 
inclination that might be felt to recording instances. The names of informants 
will, of course, be held private. 

VOL. il. T 2 


1. IT is with some hesitation that I lay before the public the 
speculations contained in the following essay. They may seem, I fear, 
both over-bold and over-complex ; and even the reader who follows them 
with a provisional adhesion will find that if he gains in width, he will lose 
in clearness of vision ; while the conception of telepathy as a relatively- 
simple mode of colligating certain obscure phenomena will give place to a 
view in which the old problems loom larger than ever, though, perhaps, 
with some inter-relations made manifest which have not hitherto been 

But in reply to the objection of rashness I must ask my readers to 
distinguish between results unanimously arrived at, on the strength of 
definite experiment and explicit testimony, by a group of painstaking 
persons, and the speculations of one of their number, to which the rest 
stand uncommitted, and which he offers tentatively, as the mere prelimi- 
naries of what may in time become a surer view. And to the objection 
of complexity I answer that my hypothesis is free at least from the one 
unpardonable sin of hypotheses : it is not certainly unverifiable, at least 
it may prompt experiment and direct observation. 

I shall assume in the following pages that the reader has already 
mastered the general drift and purport of these volumes. And, perhaps, 
I can best introduce my own view by dwelling first on a difficulty in our 
recorded evidence which drove my own mind to seek for some wider 

2. The reader, then, is aware that veridical phantasms sounds or 
sights, that is to say, coincident with some death or crisis have been 
treated in this work on the analogy of experimental thought-transference, 
as probably being in effect the externalisation of a telepathic impression, 
the hallucinatory forms in which a feeling or idea transferred from the mind 
of a distant person embodies itself to the percipient's senses. In dealing 
with the simpler forms of phantasmal sight, sound, or other impression, 
this analogy seemed to hold good ; and we found, moreover, enough of 


parallelism between telepathic hallucinations and the apparently casual 
and meaningless hallucinations of sane persons to suggest that telepathic 
phantasms were at least shaped by the percipient's mind, in the same 
manner as those delusive phantasms which the mind not only shapes, but 
presumably originates altogether. 

All this, however, referred to phantasms perceived by one person only. 
On such a theory one would hardly expect that a phantasm would ever be 
perceptible to several persons at once ; but rather that strangers in the 
company of the percipient would neither hear nor see anything, would 
not be involved, at any rate, by mere local proximity in that message 
between according minds. 

It was plain, however, that this question could not be answered 
a priori. It needed what had not hitherto been forthcoming, namely, a 
collection of observed instances large enough to allow of a tolerably wide 
induction. And the collection offered in these volumes though it might 
with advantage be tenfold larger does in fact offer some interesting 
statistical results which bear on this problem. 

In the first place, it is noticeable that the great majority of phantasms 
occur to a percipient who is alone. And this fact accords well with our 
view that the subsidence of ordinary stimuli facilitates the development of 
the telepathic impression. 

But when we come to the small residue of cases where several persons 
have been together when the phantasm occurred, we find a result equally 
unexpected and perplexing. For it will be found that in nearly two cases 
out of three the phantasm is perceived by all or most of the persons so 
situated that they would have perceived it had it been an objective reality. 
In about one case out of three it is perceived by one only of the persons 
present. And, as a further complication, when perceived by more persons 
than one, it is sometimes perceived more fully by some than by others ; 
both heard and seen, perhaps, by one, and only heard by another. 

3. Now this result seems at first sight equally inconsistent with 
the theory of the telepathic impulse as generating these hallucinations, 
and with the crude popular credence which attributes to " ghosts " some 
sort of tenuous materiality. For in the one case we might expect that the 
phantasm would rarely be perceptible to more than one person ; in the 
other case that it would always be perceptible to all the persons present. 
The popular view to take that first lies so far outside the pale 
of any recognised scientific conceptions that strong evidence indeed 
would be needed to reconcile us to it. We are sometimes asked to 
believe that this body of ours with its digestive system, &c., and all 
its traces of physical evolution is interpenetrated with a " meta- 


organism " of identical shape and structure, and capable sometimes of 
detaching itself from the solid flesh and producing measurable effects on 
the material world. Now that material effects should be produced by 
something which (like our own will), is only cognisable by us on its 
psychical side is not in itself an absurd supposition, though we have little 
evidence which goes to support it. But this hypothesis of a connate 
molecular " meta-organism " is at once grotesque and entirely insufficient. 
For it is precisely against this form of the ghost-hypothesis that the 
difficulty as to the ghosts of clothes has overwhelming weight. The appari- 
tion that stands before us, on this theory, is an objective thing ; it has 
grown with our friend's growth, it is organic with his deathless vitality. 
Are, then, his dead habiliments alive also in the spirit ? or how has the 
meta-organism accreted to itself a meta-coat and meta-trousers ? 

4. But if we thus rule out of court the crudest explanation of a 
collectively-witnessed apparition, our next attempt must plainly be to 
explain it on the lines of telepathy, by extending in some way our 
hypothesis of a phantasmogenetic impulse conveyed directly from mind to 
mind. Now if A's phantom is witnessed by B and together and 
witnessed, as we are assuming throughout, without intimation thereof 
from one to the other by look or word then it might seem simplest to 
assume that a separate telepathic impression passed from A to B, and from 
A to C, and was externalised by each of the percipients as a phantom of 
his own shaping. It has been shown, however, in Chap. XVI1L, that 
the recorded cases will not always admit of this hypothesis. C is some- 
times a stranger to A, and it is almost impossible to suppose that, had it 
not been for B's presence, he would have witnessed the phantom at all. 
In this difficulty, Mr. Gurney inclines to the view that in such a case 
the telepathic impression is primarily communicated from A to B, and 
gives rise to a hallucination in B's mind ; and that this hallucination is 
then telepathically communicated from B to the other person or persons 
present. And this explanation, if we can accept it, seems to have the 
advantage of introducing as little as possible of fresh hypothesis into the 
psychic field. 

5. I do not, however, think that the evidence warrants us in pushing 
our theory quite so far in this direction. I do not feel justified in assuming 
that a mere hallucination telepathically originated in the mind of B, the^ 
primary percipient will be thus readily communicable, by a fresh tele- 
pathic transfer, to the minds of other persons in local proximity. Hallu- 
cinations, however caused, are in themselves a tolerably distinct class of 
phenomena ; and, since we know of several kinds that are not telepathic 


in origin, we shall do well to inquire whether these have shown themselves 
communicable from the hallucine to his neighbours, without speech or 
suggestion of any kind. And it so happens that a good deal of competent 
observation has already been directed to this point. Folie a deux the 
communicability of insane delusions has been for the last quarter of a 
century a favourite topic of medical discussion. 1 Now in order that folie 
a deux should present a true parallel to the suggested infectiousness of 
telepathic hallucinations, which we are here discussing, it would 
be necessary to find cases where some vision or voice had been 
propagated from one mind to another without any verbal suggestion 
whatever. No such case, so far as I can find, is anywhere recorded ; and 
no such case is reported to me by medical friends. 2 The nearest case is 
that of the Lochin family (see the first note below), but there the attack 
of hallucinations was plainly of toxic origin, and though it ran much the 
same course with each of the poisoned persons, there is even here no proof 
that any one of them caught a definite hallucination from his neighbour's 

6. It may, however, be suggested that medical writers, not being 
alive to the possibility of an unsuggested, or telepathic, infection, may 
have neglected to observe it, and that therefore some part of the infection 
for which they assume speech as of course the medium may in reality have 
taken place without speech, by telepathic transfer. To meet this 
point, let us consider what are the habitual conditions of the contagion 
du delire, 3 as the French somewhat loosely term it. 

According to Lasegue and Falret (with whom the other authorities 
virtually concur), the person thus infected (if not already a lunatic) must 
be inferior in intelligence to the original lunatic, must generally be a 
woman or a child, and must live long with the lunatic, apart from external 
influences. Moreover, the character of the delusion must itself be more or 

1 Besides some references given by Mr. Gurney, Vol. i., p. 458, see Brunet (Ann. Med.- 
Psych., 1875, Vol. xiv., pp. 337-357), and the specially interesting case of the Lochin family 
(Ann. MM. -Psych., 1882, Vol. ii.), reported by Dr. Reverchon; Les uns voientdes fantdmes, 
des chats noirs et blancs, des serpents; its les montrent aux autrcs effares. " See also Dr.Savage's 
" Cases of Contagiousness of Delusions " (Journal of Mental Science, 1880-1, Vol. xxvi., 
p. 563), and Dr. Kiernam (Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, October, 1880), for the 
communication of ideas of grandeur in asylums. I omit many minor references. In Dr. 
Jaccoud's Diet, encycl. des sciences medicales the reader is significantly referred from Folie 
A deux to Persecutions the character of the great majority of these cases being thus 
indicated. On the whole, Lasegue and Falret's essay ((Euvres de Lasegue, Vol. i., p. 732) 
summarises the subject very completely. The latest work, Chpolianski's Analogies entre 
la folie a deux et la suicide a deux, (Pans, 1885,) accords with what has been here said. 

2 Dr. Lockhart Robertson has kindly made inquiry for me from some specialist 
friends ; and neither he nor they are cognisant of any such case. Nor are the authorities 
at Bethlem ; as, indeed, Dr. Savage's essay, above referred to, plainly indicates. 

3 The word contagion reminds us of the old stories of second-sight, communicable by 
the touch of the seer (see p. 189, note). 


less reasonable ; it must rest on real facts in the past, or intelligible fears 
or hopes for the future. The idea that a legacy has accrued, the idea that 
neighbours are malignant, is gradually instilled into a sane mind by the 
constant repetition of an untrue, but not conspicuously-absurd assertion. 
But even where this delusion includes some sensory elements, I can find, 
as I have already said, no evidence that any hallucinatory sight or sound 
has ever been described independently by two persons as occurring at 
the same moment. If, then, with all the predisposition that close relation- 
ship can give, with all the dominance of the hallucination in the affected 
mind, not even one other person seems ever to be telepathically 
impressed thereby, we may hesitate to assume that a veridical hallucina- 
tion should be capable of telepathic transference to several bystanders. 

Neither in duration nor in apparent intensity can the veridical 
hallucination claim to equal some of the morbid varieties. There are 
instances where the same illusory figure has persisted for months or years. 
Take, for instance, "Mr. Gabbage "the persistent visionary tyrant of an 
unhappy American gentleman, who was, at any rate at first, in a state of 
undoubted sanity. 1 Constantly though he appeared, distinctly though he 
spoke, " Mr. Gabbage " was never seen or heard by anyone save the 
original sufferer. 

Again, it is probable that no other hallucinations can rival in sheer 
intensity those which sometimes accompany the onset of an epileptifonn 
attack. When the patient rushes furious through the room, which he sees 
full of flames, striking at the imaginary demons who bar his passage, then 
surely, if ever, the phantasies of the tumultuous brain might be expected 
to imprint themselves on the bystander. But although the shock of 
witnessing an epileptic fit will sometimes bring on a similar tit in patients 
thereto disposed, there is, I believe, no evidence whatever that the specific 
hallucination of the first sufferer ever communicates itself either to stable 
or to unstable brains. 

Once more ; there is a species of hallucination somewhat akin to 
telepathic hallucinations nay, which is itself sometimes induced tele- 
pathically. I mean the hallucinations generated by the mesmeriser in the 
mind of his subject. Popular credence, as Mr. Gurney and I have else- 
where shown, 2 has much exaggerated the mesmerist's power of influencing 
his subject without verbal suggestion. But in a few cases Mr. H. S. 
Thompson's and Dr. Pierre Janet's, 3 for instance an effect seems to have 

1 Se M. Ribot's comments on this case of M. Ball's, Maladies de la Personnalite, 
p. 111. 

* Proceedings of the S.P.R., Vol. iii., p. 416. 

3 See the Additional Chapter at the end of this volume. In the strange and remote 
case of Councillor Wesermann (Vol. i., p. 102) it is not clear whether the distant "wilier" 
was thinking at the time of both the persons to whom the phantasm of his creating appeared. 


been produced on a subject at a distance without previous suggestion ; an 
action prompted or a hallucination provoked. Now, in no one instance 
does it appear that the effect thus telepathically produced has extended 
itself from the immediate subject to any other person. 

7. The analogies of morbid and of mesmeric hallucination are, then, as 
ic seems, decidedly against its communicability. But these analogies are not 
in themselves conclusive. Apart from the distinctively morbid hallucina- 
tions of madness or epilepsy on which physicians have almost exclusively 
dwelt there are occasional cases of isolated hallucinations occurring in 
the experience of sane and healthy persons. It may be said that these 
afford a closer parallel to our telepathic hallucinations. If it can be 
shown that these are communicable, there will be some presumption that 
our veridical phantoms may be propagated by psychical infection too. 

Now, Mr. Gurney has made a collection, far larger than had been 
previously attempted, of these casual hallucinations of the sane. His 
collection of nearly 600 cases of this kind (exclusive, of course, of the 
telepathic evidence in this book), when analysed with care, affords a 
basis of induction on which a few broad conclusions, at least, may safely 
be founded. All, however, that I mean to do here is to take one obvious 
empirical division. Some of these casual hallucinations resemble veridical 
hallucinations and some do not. In this latter class are included a 
number of purely fantastic or truncated visions of human or animal forms 
or faces, and visions of inanimate objects, patterns, &c. In the former 
class come visions of persons known or unknown, voices, lights, &c. 

Now it appears that the great majority of these casual hallucinations 
are witnessed by one person only, other persons, if present, perceiving 
nothing. But there are cases in which several persons have shared the 
impression, and some of these cases Mr. Gurney has set forth in 
Chap. XVIII. What lessons do they teach ? 

The most important characteristic that I see in them is this. They 
all of them belong to that class of casual hallucinations which at any rate 
resemble the telepathic cases. There are no collective hallucinations of 
truncated forms, of definite inanimate objects, or of patterns. They 
all represent persons known or unknown, lights, or voices. 

I will defer for the moment the consideration of some of these figures 
or voices which are referred to dead persons. Taking those only which 
are conceivably, though not provably, referable to persons living or in the 
act of death, it seems to me that we have here just that kind of fringe of 
ambiguous cases which we should expect to find surrounding the cases 
where some distant agency is more clearly proved. 

For if such a phenomenon as telepathy, such a cause or agency as 


telergy, exists at all, we may surely suppose that it exists in many forms, 
and manifests itself in many operations, of which we have not at present 
any inkling whatever. While we may be able to reach a substantial 
agreement as to what phenomena may be regarded as almost certainly due 
to telepathy, we have no means at present of deciding positively what 
phenomena are not so due. 

This, therefore, is a case where the evidential and the theoretical 
treatment of our subject cannot be made precisely to coincide. Mr. 
Gurney's primary object has been, and rightly, to treat the evidential case 
for telepathy with scrupulous fairness, to allow to chance-coincidence or to 
mere subjective hallucination every incident which cannot establish a 
strong claim to a supernormal character. So long as we are arguing the 
question whether telepathy exists or no, this rigid method is plainly 
needful. We must rest our argument on instances for which, taken 
cumulatively, any explanation except telepathy is conspicuously 

But supposing the evidential point established, and that it is now not 
the mere existence, but the nature and limits, of telepathy which we are 
seeking to determine, we shall need to scrutinize our narratives in a some- 
what different way. We shall have to consider not only whether there is 
overwhelming probability that any given case is telepathic, but also whether 
there is sufficient probability to oblige us to keep that explanation in view, 
and to refrain from using the case in support of other theories. Thus (to 
make my meaning clearer by an analogy) if it were our business to prove 
the existence of volcanic islets, we should not be entitled to base that proof 
on such doubtful instances as the much-debated islets of St. Paul. But, 
the existence of volcanic islets once established, we must not hastily 
exclude this dubious case from our category, or we may find that we are 
committing ourselves to a far more questionable theory that of a lost 
Atlantis. Now the cases cited by Mr. Gurney as probably mere subjective 
hallucinations shared by several persons are assuredly not cases from which 
any argument for the operation of distant agency could be drawn. But 
if such agency be once admitted as a vera causa, it seems to me to be safer 
to ascribe these cases to its untraced and, so to say, casual operation, than 
to support by them a theory of collective hallucination which may easily 
be and in other hands has been pushed to a point at which it comes 
into real collision with ordinary experience, and needlessly confuses the 
canons of testimony. 

We must remember that these phantasms do not occur to please us, or 
to satisfy our expectations, but rather (so far as we can tell) in accordance 
with some law affecting the psychical energies of the dying person. We 
need not, therefore, assume that our phantasmal visitors will always be 


familiar or interesting figures. It is quite conceivable that persons may 
appear to us whom we have wholly forgotten ; and in fact in some of the 
cases in this book the identification of the figure has only followed upon 
subsequent information and reflection. Again, if, as certain cases seem to 
indicate, locality goes for a great deal in attracting or manifesting the 
phantasm, then figures may appear to us which we have never seen, but 
which represent some dying person who is attached to the house in which 
we live. And suggestions such as these, though at present merely specula- 
tive, seem to me to form an explanation of Mr. Gurney's cases less violent 
than that which calls on us to suppose that a mere casual subjective 
hallucination has a self-propagating power which hallucinations of an 
intenser and more lasting order do not appear to possess. 

8. Another class of cases which Mr. Gurney has advanced as illustrat- 
ing the transferability of hallucinations consists of the occurrence to two 
or more persons of phantasms ostensibly connecting themselves with some 
person who is actually dead. I do not wish here to give any positive 
opinion as to the origin of such appearances. The question of phantasms 
of the dead introduces a whole series of evidential and metaphysical 
difficulties with which I am not here prepared to deal. But since we have 
expressly excluded such problems from the scope of this work, have 
expressly stated that our evidence is at present insufficient to guide us to a 
distinct opinion thereon, I cannot admit that any selection from these 
narratives can at present add force to the contention that purely illusory 
hallucinations, corresponding in no way to any reality outside the primary 
percipient, are readily communicable to the other persons present. 

Since, then, an inquiry so widely-reaching as Mr. Gurney's collection 
of hallucinations has failed, in my view, to produce any clear cases of the 
communicability of illusory (or falsidical ) hallucinations with which to 
supply the absence of any evidence thereof in previous records, I am 
driven to doubt whether such communicability can be safely assumed as a 
probable explanation of our cases where a veridical phantasm has been 
seen or heard by several persons at the same time. 

9. And having thus criticised my colleague's suggestions, I feel bound 
to produce a theory of my own, which, though confessedly unproveii, may 
have the advantage of directing attention towards what seems to me the 
nodus of our present inquiry, and of suggesting experiments which may 
help us to a truer solution. I begin by following a clue which suggests 
itself at a very early stage of the experimental investigation. 

Take the simplest possible case of thought-transference. A thinks of 
the word " cat " and B divines it. Now, here our habit is to call A the 


agent and B the percipient ; terms which are practically the simplest, but 
which may have seemed to imply that all the activity involved in the 
phenomenon lay in A's tension of thought in keeping " cat " before his 
mind, and that B's rdle was a mere passive waiting for the telepathic 
impulse which carries the word or idea from A's mind into his own. And 
as we extend our series from the trivial experimental instances to the 
massive spontaneous instances of telepathy, we find the exhibition of 
energy on the agent's part the receptive tranquillity on the percipient's 
part becoming more and more conspicuous. When A, for example, is 
dying in battle, and B is asleep and dreams that he sees A dying, the 
psychical activity of the one, the psychical passivity of the other, seem to 
reach their maximum. 

Let us try, however, to look a little deeper beneath the surface. 
When A thinks of cat and B guesses the word " out of A's mind," with- 
out the help of speech or gesture, then B, whether passive or not, is at 
any rate playing the part which requires the rarer qualifications. In a 
sense, no doubt, he is merely perceiving, but I need not say that percep- 
tion itself is a form of activity. If we perceive more things than an 
oyster perceives, it is not because we are more passive than the oyster, but 
more active ; because activities of our ancestors' and our own have 
developed in us eyes which now discern distant objects with an effort so 
slight that we are scarcely aware of it. Similarly with the telepathic 
experiment. When B discerns the word cat, which most of us, with only 
his opportunities, could not discern by any amount of waiting and 
passivity, we must surely conclude that B is exercising some kind of 
capacity which we cannot exercise. This power, plainly, is not of what 
we term a voluntary kind ; it is not guided by B's normal or primary 
stream of consciousness. But (as I have tried elsewhere to show) there 
is reason to suppose that our normal consciousness represents no more 
than a slice of our whole being. We all know that there exist stt6-conscious 
and wwconscious operations of many kinds ; both organic, as secretion, 
circulation, &c., which are in a sense below the operations to which our 
minds attend ; and also mental, as the recall of names, the development 
of ideas, &c., which are on much the same level as the operations to which 
our minds attend, but which for various reasons remain in the background 
of our mental prospect. Well, besides these sub-conscious and unconscious 
operations, I believe that super-conscious operations also are going on within 
us ; operations, that is to say, which transcend the limitations of ordinary, 
faculties of cognition, and which yet remain not below the threshold but 
rather above the upper fiorizon of consciousness, and illumine our normal 
experience only in transient and clouded gleams. 

This is not the place to marshal the arguments which support this 


thesis. But the thesis itself seems almost implied in the very conception 
of thought-transference. For in thought-transference we have two 
psychical phenomena, connected by an unknown chain of causation, which 
is certainly supernormal in character, and which contains at least some 
unconscious links. 

10. Let us, then, pursue this notion of some supernormal activity on 
the percipient's part. Let us treat it in the same way as we have treated 
the notion of the supernormal activity of the agent. We have credited 
the agent, A, in the " cat " experiment, with a certain power of impressing 
his thought on other minds. And we have proceeded to inquire how far 
in voluntary experiment or in spontaneous emergence this power can 
be found to go, how complex the transmitted image may be. So 
far as voluntary experiment went, the answer has been somewhat 
doubtful, for self-transmissive projections of a hallucinatory image of 
oneself such as those recorded in Vol. I., Chap. III. have always, 
as it would seem, taken place during the agent's trance or slumber. 
The spontaneous cases, on the other hand, have been very numerous ; 
cases, that is to say, where A, undergoing some shock or crisis, acts 
psychically in such a manner as to impress his presence on the minds 
of distant men. 

Let us, then, ask similar questions with regard to the supernormal 
activity of the percipient. We have seen him thus far divining a word 
on which the agent's thought was concentrated, guessing a card on which 
the agent's eyes were fixed. Are there cases, experimental or spontaneous, 
where we find him doing more than this ? sharing not a single idea only 
but a whole complex of ideas and perceptions in another man's mind ? or 
supernormally recognising an object on which no " agent's " eyes are 
looking 1 The answer to these questions would involve the whole evidence 
for induced or spontaneous clairvoyance. For the word clairvoyance may 
be used to indicate many forms of supersensory perception ; of which one 
is what we may call telepathic clairvoyance, where the clairvoyant seems 
to be seeing with the eyes, perceiving with the senses, recalling with the 
memory, of another person ; and another is what we may call independent 
clairvoyance, where the clairvoyant seems to visit scenes, or to discern 
objects, without needing that those scenes or objects should form part of 
the perception or memory of any known mind. 

The topic of clairvoyance, though unavoidable in the present discus- 
sion, is open to serious objections from which telepathy, in our view, is free. 
For we have not ourselves succeeded in making any experiments which 
corroborate that induction of clairvoyance in sensitive subjects which 
many writers have alleged. And the light which our new knowledge 


of telepathy throws on that testimony must doubtless modify it greatly 
must reduce the scattered testimony which exists for independent clair- 
voyance to a bulk much smaller than its advocates have claimed. But, 
nevertheless, speaking not for my colleagues but for myself, I do consider 
the evidence for clairvoyance, both telepathic and independent, both 
induced and spontaneous, to be adequate to justify belief ; l and, holding 
this view, I feel bound to take clairvoyance into account in any theoretic 
discussion of supernormal phenomena. 

11. And if we thus take into account the evidence for clairvoyance, 
we find a stream of new light let in on our conception of the modus 
operandi of telepathic perception. For it is a characteristic of the clair- 
voyant power that it is generally exercised when the normal powers of 
sensory percipience are in abeyance, during natural somnambulism, during 
morbid conditions of trance, or during the sleep-waking state induced by 
mesmeric passes. It seems as though this supersensory faculty assumed 
activity in an inverse ratio to the activities of common life. 

Nor is this the only instructive analogy which the records of clairvoy- 
ance suggest. The mesmeric process, which appears to be the most effective 
way of inducing the clairvoyant state, does not consist of a mere inhibition 
of ordinary psychical activities. Whatever may be its true nature, it in- 
volves, at any rate, a rapport between the operator and the subject, a 
specialised relation between two minds, which sometimes seems to serve as 
the starting-point for a supernormal percipience on the part of the 
mesmerised subject which presently transcends the scope or content of the 
interrogator's mind altogether. 

Let us return, then, to the consideration of our veridical hallucinations, 
bearing in mind these two peculiarities of clairvoyant perception ; its 
exercise in apparently inverse ratio to the activity of normal faculties, and 
its capacity for being stimulated or evoked by some kind of psychical 
influence directed towards the clairvoyant subject from another mind. 

1 2. And we shall, perhaps,first observe how much of illumination is thus 
cast upon a large and perplexing class of telepathic dreams, those, namely, 
in which B is made aware of A's state, not as if by an entry of A's 
phantom into his bedchamber, but as if by an excursion of his own into 
the room where A is actually dying. 

Dreams, as Mr. Gurney has amply explained, form only a very sub 
sidiary part of the evidential case which we put forward. Taken alone, 

1 In the present state of the subject, I hold that a writer avowing such belief is 
bound to show cause for his apparent credulity ; and this I shall hope to do on the 
earliest practicable occasion. 


they could hardly prove telepathy ; rather they are themselves shown to 
be telepathic by the analogies of the more cogent evidence drawn from 
waking hours. But though evidentially a minor branch of our subject, 
they are, nevertheless, among the most instructive of psychical phenomena. 
They show us phantasms in the making ; they initiate us into sub-conscious 
processes of which waking hallucinations are, as it were, the final output or 
manufactured result. 

But when we come to scrutinize the details of veridical dreams we find 
that amongst many where fantastic elements are commingled with the 
true, as though a central conception were embodying itself in the imagery 
which it found readiest to hand, there are some dreams where the scene 
seems to be described without such admixture, and much as it might have 
appeared to a real spectator. 

Dr. A. K. Young's dream (case 142) is closely analogous to a case of 
so-called "travelling clairvoyance." Locality, personages, and actions 
seem to have been completely realised, and the violent blows delivered by 
Dr. Young as he lay asleep in bed are the precise parallel of the shivering, 
sweating, &c., frequently recorded of clairvoyants who are witnessing 
distant scenes of heat or cold. Noteworthy in the same sense is Mrs. 
Green's dream (case 138), where it seems as though the link of kinship, 
though without personal acquaintance, had directed the sleeper's 
clairvoyant vision to the scene of sudden death. In these cases it 
seems to me that to talk of the drowning women as the agents who affected 
Mrs. Green, the wounded tenant as the agent who affected Dr. A. K. 
Young, tends to obscure the real nature of the occurrence ; the deeper 
view being that the so-called percipient was in fact the agent or active 
personage, too ; and that the concurrent crisis of danger or death did but 
determine the direction, or the remembrance, of activities which the 
sleeper's unconscious self was exercising in the abeyance of waking 

And if we follow up this hint, we shall note that in most cases where 
even a waking percipient is conscious of a distant scene, the sensation is- 
accompanied by something like a momentary abstractedness, or even 
actual somnolence. 1 In Canon Warburton's case (No. 108) the sudden percep- 
tion of a distant crisis, apparently occurring at that moment, wakes the 
sleeper from his doze And if the various expressions used by the percipients 
of these clairvoyantly witnessed scenes, whether we have classed them as 
awake or asleep at the time, be compared together, we shall find that they 
agree in describing the experience as something unlike either dream- 
presence or waking presence in the suddenly-revealed locality, as giving a 

1 See, for instance, cases 24, 63, 109. 


sense of a translation of the centre of consciousness, of a psychical 
excursion into a definite region of space. 

Such expressions need imply nothing more than the manner in which 
this sudden extension of the psychical purview represents itself in the 
forms of ordinary thought. But they may aid in putting us on the track 
of a question which is, in my view, of profound importance. Is there 
evidence of any percipience on the part of others which corresponds to 
the clairvoyant's own sense of presence and action in the scene which is 
common to his mind and theirs ? Readers of Chap. XVII. will have 
perceived that there is such evidence ; and although the cases there given 
are not numerous, there are reasons (as I hope presently to show) why 
but a very small fraction of such experiences is ever likely to come to our 

Meantime, we must observe that in these reciprocal cases the condi- 
tion and sensations of the percipient, who thus becomes an agent also the 
clairvoyant who is himself discerned as a phantom in the scene where he 
conceives himself to be are precisely similar to the condition and sensa- 
tions of the clairvoyant whose vision affects no second person. Our agent, 
too, is in a fit of abstraction, or dreaming, or plunged in stupor as death 
draws nigh, when he produces on others the impression correlative to the 
impression which is being produced on himself. 

13. Correspondently with clairvoyant perception there may be phantas- 
mogenetic efficacy ; this, as it seems to me, is a sound induction from our 
recorded cases, and an induction which, if thoroughly grasped, will modify 
profoundly our comprehension and classification of the evidence before us. 
For, speaking broadly, our " phantasms of the living " will consequently 
tend to arrange themselves into two main classes, classes which are them- 
selves linked in more ways than one ; namely, the class in which the 
phantasm may be considered as the emergence or externalisation, in and by 
the percipient's mind, of an impression transmitted from a distant agent, 
and the class in which the phantasm may be considered as corresponding to 
the conception in the mind of a clairvoyant percipient, who is thus also an 
agent, of his own presence and action in a scene which he shares with the 
persons who are corporeally present therein. 

14. And thus we have reached a point at which what seemed the 
unique difficulty involved in collective hallucinations is not indeed 
explained, but is seen as merely a special case which we can subsume under 
a higher generalisation. What I mean is this ; that if the appearance, say, 
of Mr. Newnham to Mrs. Newnham (case 35) or of Mrs. Smith to her friend 
(case 306) is held proximately to depend on their own perception of their 
VOL. n. U 


own presence in the scene where their phantasm is observed, it becomes 
then a subsidiary question whether only one, or some, or the whole group 
of the persons of whose consciousness that scene forms a part, perceive 
such phantasm or no. And this subsidiary question, again, resolves itself 
into a special case of the larger question which meets us throughout the 
whole inquiry, the question as to the causes of varying idiosyncratic 
receptiveness of phantasmal impressions. There will be no need to 
assume, as Mr. Gurney is inclined to do, a direct infection of hallucination 
from one primary percipient to neighbouring minds. Still less shall we 
need to explain such cases as Nos. 242 and 355 by the strange hypothesis 
that an idea, partly or altogether latent and undeveloped in the mind 
of the primary percipient, did nevertheless propagate itself from 
thence and emerge into full externalisation for a person to whom the 
distant agent was wholly unknown. For we shall be able to conceive it as 
possible that all the persons in the room may be equally favourably 
situated for the discernment of that phantasmal correlate which repre- 
sents or accompanies, in some way unknown to us, the clairvoyant 
percipience of the distant and dying man. 

15. At the cost of some cumbrousness of language, I have been 
careful to express my hypothesis in exclusively psychical as opposed to 
physical terms. I desire that the reader should clearly distinguish it from 
any view which implies a material or objective presence, of however 
tenuous a kind. I shall not, indeed, commit myself to the assertion that 
any such presence is impossible; or that there may not be some intermediate 
view between what seems to me the gross conception of a molecular meta- 
organism, already alluded to, and the purely psychical agency which is 
all that I postulate here. The line between the "material" and the 
" immaterial," as these words are commonly used, means little more than 
the line between the phenomena which our senses or our instruments can 
detect or register, and the phenomena which they can not. And the whole 
problem of the relation of the psychical to the physical of thought 
and will to space and matter is forced upon our attention with startling 
vividness from the very beginning of this inquiry. At every step we 
find that familiar speculative difficulties assume a new reality ; and that 
dilemmas which the metaphysician can evade, and the physicist ignore, 
present to the psychical researcher an imperative choice of one or the 
other horn. 

In the present discussion, however, such difficulties can still be 
postponed. I shall confine myself to pointing out that since some even of 
the phantasms which are perceived by more than one person escape the 
perception of one or more of the bystanders, they cannot be objective in 


any ordinary sense. And while they are regarded as entirely psychical 
incidents, the differentia of the view here advanced is still, I think, 
sufficiently plain. I treat the respective hallucinations of each member 
of the affected group as each and all directly generated by a conception in 
a distant mind a conception which presents itself to that mind as 
though its centre of activity were translated to the scene where the group 
are sitting, and which presents itself to each member of that group as 
though their hallucinations did not come to them incoherently or 
independently, but were diffused from a " radiant point," or phantasmo- 
genetic focus, corresponding with that region of space where the 
distant agent conceives himself to be exercising his supernormal 

16. This view is at any rate definite enough to suggest certain 
experiments which might test its probability in comparison with the view 
which assumes one primary percipient and a transference of hallucination, 
as though by a second telepathic process, from that primary percipient 
to his neighbours in space. 

The most important experiment would be one which there is 
perhaps small chance of making ; for it depends on the coolness and 
preparedness of several persons collectively witnessing a veridical 
hallucination. It might, for instance, have been carried out by Mrs. 
Elgee and Miss D. in the case (No. 348) which Mr. Gurney cites as one 
where " the flashing of the hallucination from one of the percipients 
to the other seems specially well illustrated, since the figure which 
appeared was one which the second percipient had never seen in the 
flesh." In that case we have no independent account from Miss D., 
and the details are insufficient to show the relation between the 
hallucinations of the two persons. But let us assume, for the sake of 
argument, that a similar incident occurs to persons prepared to analyse 
it ; that A's phantom appears to B, who knows him, and also to 0, who 
is in the room with B, but never saw A. 

I .will arrange an account of the imaginary scene in two ways ; first, 
so as to illustrate Mr. Gurney's " flashing of the hallucination from one of 
the percipients to the other " ; and, secondly, so as to illustrate my own 
view of the diffusion of the hallucination to both minds similarly, in a 
manner conditioned by the agent's conception of himself as present in a 
scene in which the two percipients are sitting. 

(1) B sees the figure first, and thus develops the hallucinatory figure of 
A, clothing it with the dress in which he has most frequently seen A. 
discerns the figure after B has done so, and either more vaguely or in the same 
garb in which B discerns it, or with peculiarities which may be traced to 

VOL. II. U 2 


O's own mind ; at any rate, not introducing true points of resemblance 
to A, which have not been observed by B. Moreover, if B's hallucination 
represents A as facing him, C's hallucination takes a similar attitude, 
although C may be so placed with reference to the figure that, had it been 
A in proprid persond, C would have seen, not A's full face, but his 
profile or back. There is no distinct agreement between B and as to 
the point of space which the phantom seemed to occupy, or as to its 
successive movements, or the time and mode of its disappearance. Such 
details as these, if occurring in the manner here suggested, would favour 
the supposition that C's hallucination was not the result of any direct 
transfer from A, but rather of a transfer from B of the hallucination 
to which B's mind had given shape. 

(2) Now let us suppose that these little incidents occur in just the 
opposite manner. C perceives the phantom before B does, and perceives it 
with characteristic details of garb and appearance, some of which B fails to 
note. Moreover, when B and C are so placed that C would see the 
phantom's back, and B the phantom's face, were the phantom a real person 
in the place where B sees it, then they do see different aspects of the 
phantom accordingly. And they agree as to every detail of its garb, so 
far as observed, and as to its apparent position in space, its movements, 
and the mode of its disappearance. If the details of the hallucination were 
found to follow this type, there would seem to be strong reason for suppos- 
ing that the impression on C 's mind was not (so to say) reflected from 
B's, but that both alike corresponded to a more or less detailed, definite, 
and persistent conception on A's own part of his presence and action in 
the scene where his friend and the stranger were sitting. In that case 
the manner or distinctness with which the phantom was discerned by B 
and C respectively would depend on their relative power of supernormal 
percipience, their psychical permeability, though it will still be presum- 
able that B's previous rapport with A, which has probably determined the 
direction which A's clairvoyant perception has taken, may also predispose 
or enable B to discern the phantom on some occasions when C cannot 
do so. On the other hand, if C's power of supernormal percipience greatly 
exceed B's, C may discern the phantom, though of a stranger, when B fails 
to discern it, though of a friend, as in cases 242 and 355, above 

17. The occasions on which such observations as these are possible 
are likely to be almost as rare as eclipses. But, in the meantime, we may, 
at any rate, practise (so to say) with smoked glass. We have now the 
means of actually producing hallucinations at will in certain subjects by 
hypnotic suggestion, and a careful arrangement of conditions may throw 


light on the modes of communicability of hallucination from one mind to 

I will take first the simplest case, and will suppose that I am communi- 
cating a hallucination to several hypnotised subjects by direct suggestion. 
I say to the first : " There is a playbill on the wall ; write down the 
name of the play advertised, but do not show it to anyone." He sees the 
imaginary playbill at my suggestion, and his own mind supplies the title 
of the play say Hamlet. I simultaneously, or just afterwards, make the 
same suggestion to other subjects. Now if all of them see Hamlet 
advertised, the special form in which the first subject shaped his hallu- 
cination has probably influenced the rest. Even if they see Othello, 
Macbeth, &c., there has perhaps been a communication of the idea of 
Shakespeare. But if they see Our Boys, The Private Secretary, &c., then 
the specific form which the first subject's hallucination assumed has not 
exercised a shaping power over the impulses to hallucination which I have 
communicated to the other subjects. 

Again, take a case of deferred hallucination, as when Professor Beaunis 
of Nancy told Mdlle. A., in the hypnotic trance, that she would see 
him call on her on January 1st at 10 a.m. Let a similar anticipatory idea 
be again impressed on Mdlle. A, and let it be provided that other persons, 
known to be susceptible, shall be in Mdlle. A's company when the hallu- 
cination falls due. It can then be seen whether they " catch it from her," 
so to say, by telepathic infection. Or if they fail to do so, the trans- 
ference might be facilitated as follows. Mdlle. A might be led to expect 
Professor Beaunis' visit in a special dress, carefully impressed on her. The 
others might simply be told that the Professor would call at the hour 
determined. It might then be seen whether the hallucination which 
had been suggested to them in a comparatively vague form were 
rendered definite by infection from Mdlle. A's clearer perception of the 
phantasmal visitant, so that all alike saw him in the dress announced 
to Mdlle. A. 

The subjects on whom such experiments as these can be attempted 
with success are at present few in number, and almost exclusively French. 
But the methodical zeal with which a group of French physicians are now 
pursuing this form of research renders it likely that fresh light will soon 
be shed on the genesis and development of hallucinatory percepts. Such 
theorising, therefore, as I am here attempting need not be premature, if 
it serves to suggest experiment, and to guide observation. 

18. But those who have followed me thus far will find that a further 
reflection is here naturally suggested. If in cases of collective hallucination 
we have seen reason to conjecture that there has been, not a mere series of 


telepathic transferences of impression, but a presentation as a quasi- 
percept to several minds of a distant agent's conception of himself as 
present among them by a kind of psychical translation, then we can 
hardly suppose that this explanation is applicable to collective cases alone. 
The accident that some indifferent person shared with the primary friend 
the perception of the phantasm may enlighten us as to the mode in which 
that phantasm was generated, but cannot have itself determined that mode. 
Can we decide, then, for which of the apparitions seen by one person 
only our newly-suggested method of origination may most plausibly be 
invoked ? 

Much, I think, might be learnt from reviewing the whole series of our 
phantasms, while keeping in view the analogy of the alleged cases of 
experimental clairvoyance in the same way as the analogy of experimental 
telepathy has been kept in view in the preceding chapters. But such a 
task must be postponed till the evidence for clairvoyance itself shall have 
been subjected to a searching analysis. All that I can attempt here is 
to draw attention to two problems, already repeatedly touched on by Mr. 
Gurney, but capable of being discussed with profit from several points of 
view. I speak of the apparent garb and symbolism of phantasms, and of 
their attraction to special localities. 

19. The question of the clothes of ghosts or the ghosts of clothes 
is one which presents the relation between the material and the immaterial 
under a specially grotesque aspect. Theories which attribute any kind of 
materiality to the "White Lady " or " Grey Lady " herself, are apt to get 
inextricably entangled in her shadowy muslin. And apart from any definite 
theorising, the frock-coat or the flowered dressing-gown of the " spiritual 
visitant," has seemed to many minds to destroy his dignity and interest 
to be painfully incongruous with pure existences and a noumenal world. 
On the other hand, I need hardly, at this point, explain that on the hy- 
pothesis advanced in this book, this very mundaneness of the apparition 
is precisely what was to be expected. For veridical hallucinations like 
morbid hallucinations, though in a different sense are the outcome of 
human minds ; the form in which my friend's phantasm presents itself 
to me has been stamped thereon either by my friend's mind or my own. 
And it therefore would be strange if I phantasmally saw the dying 
man unclothed, as I have never seen him in life ; if he, in his last 
moments, pictured himself as he has never hitherto pictured himself in 
colloquy with his friends. 

But granting the almost unavoidable supposition that the phantom will 
appear clothed and clothed in some such way as either agent's or perci- 
pient's mind can suggest questions remain which are among the most 


important and the most difficult with which we have to deal. The clothes 
of apparitions are like the cartouches of Egyptian kings they are hiero- 
glyphs, in part seemingly arbitrary, in part obviously symbolical, which 
we must compare and decipher before we can arrange our processional 
figures by date and dynasty. For the most part these phantoms remain but 
for a moment, and are gone without speech or action before their astonished 
spectator has recovered from the shock of their approach. Sometimes 
their faces present some change or particularity, as of hair or beard, of 
pallor or injury, which in some degree identifies the moment of time, 
past or present, which that phantasmal visage tends to reproduce. But 
often such traces fail us. The witness gazes, not on some scarred and 
mangled form Priamiden laniatum corpore toto but on the unchanged 
aspect of a familiar friend. For most observers such recognition is enough, 
as it is enough for the devout worshipper to recognise in a picture the 
Madonna's face. Too soon the vision disappears iterum crudelia retro 
Fata vacant and what is left is the shock of loss, the memory of consola- 
tion. It is from no want of sympathy with those primary emotions that 
we must urge on the readers of this book the imperative need, should 
occasion be offered to them, of a minuter and calmer observation. Every 
detail of the phantasmal appearance has some meaning ; and the points 
which the spectator accepts as subordinate and unimpressive may contain 
clues sought elsewhere in vain. Thus to come at once to my present pur- 
pose it is usual for a witness to say "he appeared to me in the dress he 
habitually wore, and in which I knew him." In one sense these two 
clauses mean the same thing. But which of them is the really effective 
one ? If A's phantom wears a black coat, is that because A wore a black 
coat, or because B was accustomed to see him in one ? If A had taken 
to wearing a brown coat since B saw him in the flesh, would A's phantom 
wear to B's eyes a black coat or a brown ? Or would the dress which A 
actually wore at the moment of death dominate, as it were, and supplant 
phantasmally the costumes of his ordinary days ? 

Those who have followed the cases cited in this book, and Mr. Gurney's 
comments thereon, will know that the answer to these questions is neither 
uniform nor clear. It is seldom that we can trust the percipient's memory 
of the details of his vision, and even when these details have been carefully 
noted their lesson is not easy to decipher. 

We have, of course, as a starting point, the known fact that a man 
may have a purely subjective hallucination, and may clothe it in almost 
any fashion, introducing items of dress which have never been 
consciously familiar to his mind. We may naturally begin, then, by 
assuming that, unless evidence to the contrary be forthcoming, it is from 
the percipient's mind that the dress or other imagery of the phantom is 


drawn. Let us see whether there are any cases where this seems clearly 
indicated by the particulars of the dress itself. 

Suppose that the dying A appears to B, habited in hat and coat, 
though in point of fact he is in bed at the time. Must we not here say 
that B's mind has furnished the setting of the figure, and that nothing 
beyond the mere impression of a personality comes from A himself ? 

No ; this deduction would be insecure. For it assumes that if the 
agent projects a developed phantom of himself, a conception of himself, 
that is to say, which B's mind externalises as a phantom, he will 
necessarily project it as though clad in the garments which he is wearing 
at the time. But we have no grounds for assuming this. Just as B may 
imagine A as wearing a familiar greatcoat, so may A imagine himself as 
wearing that coat, whatever be his actual dress at the time. 

Suppose that we dream of calling on a friend. In most cases we 
dream of ourselves as in ordinary walking attire. It is only rarely that 
we dream of entering a drawing-room in tiefem neglige, as the Germans 
put it, an obscure sense of one's actual condition entering, with 
disastrous incoherence, into the feebly co-ordinated story of one's 

Now, if we are comparing these veridical hallucinations to 
objectified dreams, we must at least allow for the chance of the dream 
being the agent's own ; we must not assume that it is always so to say 
dreamt for him by the person to whom he appears. Whatever the agent's 
actual dress at the time, all the cases where he appears merely in his 
usual costume must be set aside as neutral. "We cannot press them to 
prove the origin of the figure in either the one or the other mind. 

Is there, then, any feature to which we can point as undoubtedly due 
to the workings of the percipient's mind ? anything in the associations of 
the dress ? or in the special symbolism of the apparition ? It is plain that 
associations attaching to A's dress must be common to A as well as to B. 
Suppose that B saw the dying A habited in a coat which A wore at B's 
wedding, or at some other epochal moment in B's life. It must still be 
remembered that that same moment was epochal to A also, in so far as his 
relation to B was concerned, and that its conscious or unconscious memory 
may influence A's conception of himself as bidding B a last farewell. 
Similarly, a man who recalls his acts of homage to Royalty vaguely feels 
himself in Court dress ; a man who imagines himself talking to a hunting 
acquaintance has a slight sense what is called a " phantom " sense of 
being on horseback. 

And this ambiguity, I think, attaches to the few cases in which, as 
Mr. Gurney urges, the "ghosts of old clothes," in which the phantom 
appears, indicate the percipient's memory as the source of that investiture. 


In Colonel and Mrs. Holland's case (201), a scrutiny of the dates and facts 
given will show that we have no reason to regard Ramsay's clothes as old, 
as otherwise than still the suit in which he would be likely to imagine 
himself as calling on a former mistress. In case 200, a brother delirious 
in Australia, and fancying himself at home, appears to his sister 
on the lawn, " dressed as he usually was when he came home from 
London, not as he was when he left home, nor as he could be in Australia, 
nor as I had ever seen him when walking in the garden." Surely all that 
this dress implied was the idea of a traveller's home-coming, which was at 
any rate the dominant one in the brother's ravings. Had it been his 
wonted garden costume, then to my mind the dress, though still 
ambiguous, would have looked more probably referable to the sister's 
shaping imagination. 

In a third and fourth case, (No. 202, and p. 546, second note,) there 
is an admixture of unexplained grotesqueness, (the lady in a carriage, the 
boy " enclosed, as it were, in a dark cellar "), which seems to remove 
these cases into the category next to be considered, namely, where the 
phantasmal figure is accompanied by symbolism, whose origin we have to 
ascribe to one or the other mind. Such symbolism, as Mr. Gurney has 
pointed out, is usually referable to some " mental habit or tradition," 
which is probably common to both the minds concerned. One can, of 
course, imagine a case where the symbolism should be such as the 
percipient's mind alone would be likely to think of ; as if, for instance, the 
" thousands of angels as tight as they could be packed," which (in case 
207) are seen surrounding a departed Christian friend, had formed the 
symbolic escort of a pronounced Agnostic. 

20. But in default of such narratives as this, the cases where the in- 
fluence of the percipient's idiosyncrasy seems most marked are those where 
the same percipient has a recurrent symbolical dream, coincident on each 
occasion with a death or other marked occurrence. We have a few such 
cases, but in the most remarkable of them (No. 131) the form of the dream 
is not exactly idiosyncratic, but rather takes on a form with which students 
of folk-lore are already familiar. The traditions of folk-lore, it may 
be remarked, form a kind of endemic symbolism, in which both morbid and 
veridical hallucinations tend to clothe themselves. In some cases we have 
found a community of Celtic fishermen, or the like, so deeply impregnated 
with traditions of this kind that we cannot accept their accounts of corpse- 
candles, &c., though supported by apparent coincidences of fact, as of real 
evidential value. We are obliged, that is to say, to treat such a community 
as subject to casual hallucinations, which detract from the importance of 
such coincidences with objective fact as do from time to time occur. It is 


only in some of the remoter regions of Wales and Scotland that we have 
found superstitions of this sort active and definite. But the tendency to the 
recurrence of some special symbolism symbolism of which the percipient 
may never remember to have heard among the dreams of educated 
persons, reminds us sometimes of the sporadic endemicity of certain 
traditions of folk-lore, of which this very tendency may be itself the 
proximate cause. 

In our present collection, however, we have included very little of such 
symbolism, and to what there is we can assign no certain origin in agent's 
or percipient's mind. 

21. On the whole, then, it seems that we have few indications in the 
dress or other surroundings of fully-developed veridical phantoms which 
point conclusively to an origin in the percipient's mind. Are there instances, 
on the other hand, which yield the reverse indication ? that is, where the 
dress or imagery seems manifestly traceable to the mind of the agent 
himself ? 

Such indication may conceivably be given in two main ways. The 
agent's dress or aspect at the moment may be phantasrnally repro- 
duced ; or there may be symbolism, not vague or traditional in character, 
but plainly adapted to communicate some information known to the agent 

Of the first of these classes the reader will have observed a good many 
examples. There are, first of all, the phantoms in night-dress. In one or 
two cases (e.g., No. 563,) these are apparitions of persons whom the 
percipient knows to be dying, and the white dress might, therefore, be 
suggested by the percipient's mind. But in other cases (see especially No. 
214) there is no expectation of the agent's death, and the dress astonishes 
the percipient by its incongruity. 

Still more remarkable are the cases where the dying man appears in a 
dress which he is actually wearing at the moment, although it is not such 
as is usually associated with death-beds. The case of Dr. Bowstead (No. 
212), commented on by Mr. Gurney, may serve as a type of this class. In 
such a case as that (to anyone who believes that more than mere chance is 
involved), it must surely seem more probable that the dress of the phantom 
was the creation of the dying man's mind rather than of the mind of the 
boy to whom that phantom appeared. And it is observable that while 
such evidence as points to the percipient's part in shaping these figures is 
indirect and inferential, the evidence which points to their full-blown 
projection from the agent's mind is often as direct and unmistakeable as 
any evidence on such a point can be expected to be. 


22. Next as regards the symbolism which accompanies the figure. 
The commonest case of symbolism if such it is to be called consists in 
the wet clothes of the apparition of a drowned man. There is possibly 
something in death by asphyxiation which (as it seems to revive past 
memories with unusual vividness) predisposes also to telepathic action. 
At any rate, we have a good many of such cases, and there seems almost 
always to be some specific indication of the manner of death. " Dripping 
with water," "his hair wet," "pale, sad, and wet," "looking half- 
drowned," such are the phrases which recur. The distinctive mark here 
is very simple it may be said to be nothing more than a translation into 
visibility of the idea " He is drowning." We might, therefore, suppose 
that it had perhaps originated in the percipient's mind. But this view is 
rendered less plausible by the cases where the apparition presents more 
detailed marks of accident, change, or disease, as the wound on the chest 
in case 210, the trembling and pallor in case 527, the grey hair in case 194, 
and the complex and partly symbolical aspect of the phantom in case 25. 
It is worth remarking that " N. J. S. " (case 28), who looked carefully at 
the details of his apparition, is of opinion that the walking-stick which his 
friend held (but which " N. J. S." never remembered to have seen him 
using) was symbolical, and meant to imply departure and a farewell. The 
case (No. 514) of the lady seen with a lock of hair cut off and a " peculiar 
light upon her," presents a somewhat similar mixture of true reproduction 
and symbolism ; and the extraordinary narrative of Sengireef (No. 449), 
which throughout resembles an extravagant dream, shows that the 
phantom presented some details (of beard, &c.) which were true and 
unknown to the percipient. My view in that instance is that the dream 
in reality was not Madame Aksakoff's, but Sengireef 's ; that its insane 
strangeness was the reflection of the confused clairvoyance of a delirious 
monomaniac. With this last case I should compare No. 349 : the difference 
being that here, instead of the sombre wildness of the fanatic, we have the 
devout aspiration of the Catholic boy. I should explain, that is to say, the 
figure of St. Stanislaus as the reflected embodiment of a dying dream. 

I have said enough, perhaps, to enable the reader to form his own 
judgment on this point from the cases recorded in these volumes. On the 
one hand, if he accepts our general argument as to the connection of purely 
subjective and veridical hallucinations, he will recognise that there is a 
certain & priori likelihood that the details of the hallucination will be 
found to emanate from the percipient's mind. And he may be disposed 
to follow Mr. Gurney in classing dubious cases by this presumption ; in 
ranking as exceptional the narratives where the details seem plainly 
derived from the mind of the agent. If, on the other hand, he views the 
cases which I have mentioned (and many others which resemble them) in 


the light in which I have tried to place them, he may recognise that when 
the apparition does present any distinct details, these are almost always 
such as the agent's mind might most naturally have supplied ; and that 
this fact suggests a doubt as to whether there may not be something 
more than a simple telepathic impulse involved ; whether the obscurer 
agency of clairvoyance must not here be invoked ; an analogy 
suggesting that certain modes of supernormal percipience and self- 
realisation in a distant scene may produce upon the persons placed in that 
scene an impression as of the actual presence of the clairvoyant among them, 
in a manner corresponding to his own momentary conception of himself. 

23. Connected, in a certain way, with the symbolism of which we 
have been speaking, is another point of interest in these phantasmal 
appearances. I mean the difficulty which is sometimes felt in recognising 

To begin with, it is no doubt possible to suppose that the percipient's 
mind builds up the hallucination, so to say, from some unconscious 
stratum, so that the conscious self does not at the first moment understand 
the figure presented. This would be a form of gradual development of 
the quasi-percept which could be paralleled both from ordinary dreams and 
from automatic writing. I cannot, indeed, find that purely subjective 
hallucinations ever develop themselves in this way. Yet I should myself 
see no real difficulty in applying this explanation even to cases where the 
recognition wholly fails at the time, and is only effected afterwards by 
conscious reflection. Such a case would resemble the anagrams which an 
automatic writer will sometimes commit to paper, 1 without understanding 
at the time what are the words which his unconscious self has thus 
concealed in a meaningless group of letters. 

But, nevertheless, some of the recorded particulars seem to point to the 
simpler explanation namely, that the phantom's details were developed 
independently of the percipient's mind, and that the figure merely failed 
in making itself known to him. Sometimes, for example, the percipient 
looks attentively at the figure, but mistakes it for some one who 
resembles the person whom the figure is afterwards found to represent. 2 
Sometimes the phantom which the percipient fails to recognise represents 
a person whom he might equally have failed to recognise in the flesh. 3 
Sometimes a call is repeated, as if in insistant appeal. 4 And there are 
a few cases, we could not expect many, where a percipient has seen a 
figure wholly unknown to him, but which he has afterwards been able to 
identify by circumstantial evidence. Such are cases 544 and 215. Under 

1 See Proceedings, S.P.R., Vol. ii., p. 226, &c. 2 See cases 170 and 171. 

3 See cases 189 and 241. * See especially case 508. 


this category, too, comes the singular apparition detailed in case 30, 
whatever explanation we may prefer to give to it. 

Cases like these incline me to think that we are still in danger of an 
old error in a modified form, the error of attributing too much 
importance to the person who sees the phantom, because his account of 
the matter is the only one which we can get. We are, indeed, no longer 
affected by the crude emotional form of this mistake, as when the 
percipient considers the apparition to be a breach of natural laws 
permitted expressly in favour of himself. But our own conception of the 
apparition as the result of a telepathic transference of impression from 
the one to the other mind is apt, I think, to obscure the possibility of 
generative causes quite apart from any pre-existing rapport between the 
two persons. 

24. Thus, to proceed to the next point which I had selected for 
notice, it seems to me that the attraction which determines the phantasmal 
presence is sometimes local rather than personal. This apparent in- 
fluence of a certain locality may be observed in several different stages. 
In some cases the phantasmal visitor appears to an acquaintance with 
whom he has some slight link, and who is also in a spot to which the 
dying man is attached. Here the telepathic impulse may have been 
facilitated by the familiar locality. But in a few cases, as already 
mentioned, the dying man appears to persons with whom he is in no way 
acquainted. And I believe that in every clear instance of this kind there 
has been a local attraction, a reason which draws the dying person to that 
house or field, irrespective of the living persons who may be there at the 

Case 666 is a good example of what I mean. 1 But at the same time it 
warns me to press my argument no further. For just as in certain dreams, 
already mentioned, we discerned the point of contact between thought- 
transference and clairvoyance, so in this appearance, (as it may seem to 
have been,) of a dying person to the casual inhabitants of her former home 
we have the point of contact between the topic of this work and the 
evidence which bears on the haunting of particular spots. To the clair- 
voyance, when thus confronted with it, I felt able to express a distinct 
adhesion. But as to the haunting I have no equally clear opinion. 

Now it is probable that what appears to us as local attraction may 
sometimes be a mere phase of psychical rapport. To explain my meaning, 

1 See also case 29, where the phantom would appear to have been more probably 
interested in a tomb round which the dying person's eccentric thoughts had so often 
revolved, than in the ex-gardener who chanced to pass through the familiar church- 
yard ; and case 211, where the dying man seems to have been wishing to see Mr. L., in 
whose drawin -groom the phantom appeared, not Miss L., who chanced to be present 
there. Oase 192 is similar. 


let us assume that all minds whatsoever are telepathically connected, in such 
a manner that the existence of any given conception in any mind throws 
that mind into connection with every other mind in which that conception 
exists at the moment. Let us further suppose that at the hour of death 
this faint potential rapport is quickened in the same way as the more 
permanent and individual forms of rapport with which we have mainly 
had to deal. Then when a man dies et dulcis moriens reminiscitur Argos, 
this remembrance of his early home may bring him into telepathic relation 
with the stranger now living there, and that stranger may discern the 
dying man's phantom merely because the two minds are simultaneously 
occupied with an identical conception. 

This view, which is practically held by Mr. Gurney, seems to me to 
express what is probably some part of the truth. I conceive that, if 
telepathy be a fact, something of diffused telepathic percolation is pro- 
bably always taking place. This at least is what the analogy of the 
limitless and continuous action of physical forces would suggest. If I lift 
my little finger I affect, like Zeno's sage, the whole universe by my act. 
I apply a vis a tergo to atoms which, for aught I know, may send my push 
rolling on to the Pleiades. Or again, the heat, part of which I can by an 
effort concentrate on an apple in my hand, is in fact radiating continuously 
from all my organism, and fastest in the direction of readiest conduction. 
And similarly it is not unreasonable to suppose that the same telergy 
which is directed in a moment of crisis towards a man's dearest friend, may 
be radiating from him always towards all other minds, and chiefly towards 
the minds which have most in common with his own. 

Yet it seems to me that this is not enough wholly to explain our cases 
of local attraction. Before we can assume that any perceptible telepathic 
impact can follow the lines of so transitory and contingent a rapport as 
that implied, for instance, by Mr. Bard's presence in Hinxton Churchyard, 
in case 29, we ought, I think, to have some case where a phantom 
has appeared to B without previous acquaintance, on the ground 
of some community of ideas and interest between the two, unconnected 
with any special locality. Now, so far as I know, there is not, among our 
cases recognised as telepathic, a single incident of this kind. 

25. Here, then, we are again met by this perplexing problem of the 
relation of psychical operations to space ; and although, as already said, 
I shall avoid any attempt at its discussion in this work, the reader will 
probably recognise that some such hypothesis as that of an independent 
clairvoyant perception of the dying man's, reflected in a correspondingly- 
localised hallucination for other minds, is strongly suggested by such 
narratives as these. 


There is, however, an obvious difficulty in this view which must be 
discussed before we go further. I have spoken repeatedly of acts of 
clairvoyant percipience on the dying man's part, corresponding to the 
location and movement of the apparition which the distant friend discerns. 
But where is the evidence of this clairvoyant percipience ? Ought we not 
to have the dying man's testimony that he saw his friend as well as the 
friend's testimony that he saw the dying man ? Ought not the mass of 
our cases, in this view, to be reciprocal ? and is not that type, in fact, of 
very rare occurrence in our collection ? 

The difficulty seems formidable ; but there is, I think, a sufficient and 
an instructive reply. To put it in a sentence, the recollection of an act 
of clairvoyance is itself an occurrence as rare as is the perception of an 
apparition ; it involves the same difficult translation of a quasi-percept 
from the supernormal to the normal consciousness. The very act of 
clairvoyance presupposes a psychical condition as far removed as may be 
from the stream of every-day sensation. The clairvoyance alleged to have 
been induced by direct experiment, as by mesmeric passes and the like, 
seems hardly ever to have been remembered by the subject on waking. 
So also the clairvoyance, on a smaller scale and more resembling 
hyperaesthesia, which has shown itself in certain cases of spontaneous 
somnambulism, seems rarely to persist into the normal memory. And, 
speaking generally, all supernormal operation (so far as we can at present 
tell) tends to form a secondary memory of its own, alternating with, or 
apart from, the memory of common life. 

In order, then, that a " reciprocal " case may occur a case in which 
A remembers to have had a clairvoyant perception of B and B's environ- 
ment, while B also has perceived A's phantasm at approximately the same 
time two chances have to concur, two difficulties to be surmounted, the 
difficulty on A's part of recollecting his clairvoyant percipience, and the 
difficulty on B's part of externalising into memorable distinctness the 
corresponding impression conveyed to him. And we may expect that it 
will be hard to get a complete or stable account of so hazardous a 
transmission as this, a kind of signalling between boats one of which 
expects no signal, and which come in sight of each other only when 
they both chance to be riding for a moment on the crest of a wave. 

26. Nay, more ; in most cases the signalling boat can only produce a 
momentary flash, and sinks to the bottom directly after. In other words, 
the agent dies ; and if indeed he has enjoyed a clairvoyant percipience 
of B (who saw his phantom), he at any rate cannot return and tell us. 
The great bulk of what might have been evidence to the reciprocality of 
supernormal percipience is thus destroyed at a blow. 


Not even here, however, need we abandon all hope of getting at some 
fragments of evidence. The last words, the last gestures of dying men, 
which have been noted so eagerly by many a religious, and many a self- 
seeking bystander, may have for us an interest unconnected either with 
their form of creed or with their testamentary dispositions. Nothing, 
perhaps, has been so little looked for at death-beds as the special indica- 
tions which we desire, indications not of a first perception of another 
world, but of a last of this. Yet there are scattered tokens of some such 
supernormal percipience on the part of dying men, which carry us from 
mere vague expressions to distinct statements as to the distant person who 
has been clairvoyantly seen. Thus in case 309 the dying woman's state- 
ment is merely to be noted in connection with others of more weight. 
Case 296 must either be dismissed as a mere coincidence, of a very 
extraordinary kind, or accepted as an almost typical instance of what 
might, on my hypothesis, be expected to occur. Case 303 points in the 
same direction. Case 683, though well attested, is one whose bizarrerie'm&y 
disincline the reader to attach to it the weight which I think that it ought 
to carry. On looking closer the reader will see that there are other features 
in that account besides mere grotesqueness ; features which are very 
unlikely to depend upon any failure, or any embellishment, of memory. 
And if, as I am disposed to believe, what is there implied did actually 
occur, few words of men momentarily recalled from death have had a 
stranger significance. 

Then we come to cases where there is a distinct statement of the 
dying person's. In this connection, case 354 seems to me important. It 
is remote, no doubt ; but Miss W. has herself told me, with an earnestness 
that I cannot doubt, that it was, in a sense, the turning incident of her 
life, having excited a very marked influence on her character. Then there 
is case 612, and the parallel example given in the note on that case. 
Now I do not say that it is impossible that any one of these cases may 
have been merely subjective on the one part, though veridical on the 
other ; so that Miss Ws. dying aunt, for instance, only fancied that she 
saw her niece, while the niece did actually behold a phantom of her aunt 
at a corresponding time. But I doubt whether many minds will rest at 
this point precisely. Those who believe in the reality of the one experi- 
ence will probably believe in the reality of the other; remembering that 
a dying person's object is not to collect evidence, and that it must be a 
mere chance whether he mentions any incident which can vouch to others 
for the genuineness of his clairvoyant perception. 

I will conclude this section with a narrative whose accuracy there is 
no reason to doubt, though, on the other hand, it contains no complete proof 
of anything beyond a mere subjective hallucination. It finds therefore, no 


place in our array of evidence ; but it will have an interest to those who 
have followed the present argument, as illustrating an occurrence which, 
in my view, must probably often take place, though it can seldom leave 
any record behind it. For here we have an account of that side only of 
the reciprocal incident which is usually lost to human knowledge 
altogether ; I mean of the supernormal percipience of a man in the very 
article of death ; while there is no record of any corresponding sound or 
vision as experienced by those to whom he seemed to pay his visit of 

Dr. Ormsby writes as follows from Murphysborough, Illinois. 

" April 22nd, 1884. 

" I received my degree from Rush Medical College, Chicago, 111., 
at the close of the session 1857-8, and having said so much will pro- 
ceed to give you as clear and complete a statement of the occurrence to 
which you allude as I can. Early in February, 1862, the 18th Regiment 
Illinois Volunteer Infantry, of which I was Assistant-Surgeon, was 
ordered from Cairo to join in the attack on Fort Henry. The surgeon 
went with the regiment, and left me with the sick in the Regimental 
Hospital about 30 among whom was Albert Adams, sergeant-major 
of the regiment. He was an intelligent and estimable young man, who